Jump to content



Photo

TeamSandcrawla.net - New Articles Aug Week 4, now covering WH40KC!


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 MoSSBerG

MoSSBerG

    Member

  • Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 29 August 2014 - 08:23 PM

Happy Labor Day all!  New articles for 8W4:
 
SWLCG - A Living Meta: National Diversity - http://teamsandcrawla.net/?p=1849
Warhammer Conquest - Deck: Kickin' Astra -  http://teamsandcrawl...la.net/?p=2017 
Warhammer Conquest - Deck: Space Marines -   http://teamsandcrawla.net/?p=1732
 
I'd like to say that I'm in love with WH40KC, and I can't wait to write more about it on the site.


#2 booored

booored

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,002 posts

Posted 29 August 2014 - 09:06 PM

mine is a terrible card... get rid of it.

 

Also, what plug-in are you using for the deck? Very nice. Is that a wordpress plugin?


"People should be less concerned about whether they are being insulted and more concerned if it is the truth"

#3 SDKFZ

SDKFZ

    Member

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 29 August 2014 - 10:29 PM

mine is a terrible card... get rid of it.

 

MoSSBerG seems to have a different opinion;

"I see nothing reasoning me out of running 3x Promethium Mines in just about every WH40KC deck."

 

BTW good articles MoSS.


blah blah blah


#4 booored

booored

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,002 posts

Posted 29 August 2014 - 11:03 PM

he's wrong.
"People should be less concerned about whether they are being insulted and more concerned if it is the truth"

#5 BCwarpriest

BCwarpriest

    Member

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 30 August 2014 - 12:23 AM

What logic dictates that Promethium Mine is a bad card?

 

I mean if you look at it mathematically, I'm making a 1 resource investment that pays for itself the following turn. After that, the rest of the resources it provides are pure profit. In an aggro deck that additional point could be used to ensure I get another little dude on the board. On the other side of things, in curve based builds it will ensure that I am able to drop something big each turn if I so wish it. In a game with limited contested resources, this card seems like a must. Especially, when you couple that with the fact that there's only one card in the current meta that can remove it from play.


  • Wytefang likes this

It is through hope that you will find solidarity, but only through destruction will you find solitude.


#6 Shunsen

Shunsen

    Member

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 30 August 2014 - 01:15 AM

Because it is limited and therefore can't be played the turn where you play your faction cost reducer. Which is superior as it already repays the turn it enters play.

#7 BCwarpriest

BCwarpriest

    Member

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 30 August 2014 - 01:53 AM

I can agree with that to some extent, but the reducer is unique and will likely only be run as a one of in a deck. With that consideration in place, it means overall it will have a much lower draw chance. You also have to consider that the reducers are all faction specific, so they will lose overall effectiveness in decks that have a more split unit base. Where as the mine will always produce a resource that I can use for any type of unit, event, support or attachment. (Note: I know the reducers can only be used for units).

 

They are both good cards, but I think the mine is more versatile and will hit the field more often. That being said, I would still probably run the one of, my faction specific reducer, as well as the 3 mines. As they are both useful in regards to resource management.


It is through hope that you will find solidarity, but only through destruction will you find solitude.


#8 booored

booored

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,002 posts

Posted 30 August 2014 - 05:56 AM

The "limited" means you can not dump the cards.. at best you can get 3 down in 3 turns.
 

I mean if you look at it mathematically


The maths is why it doesn't work out...
 

The mine looks good in the early run, but how many turns is the game going to run.. around 7 + 2 or -2 is a guess. It pays for itself the turn after it goes down. So in the next turn you are still dead even as if you hadn't played a card at all. It is only in the 3rd turn that a profit starts to be show at +1. So you looking at 3 turns when your spent resource and more importantly card slot has basically done jack ****, then another 2 to get that profit to a +3.

So unless you get it down super early you are going not going to get its full value. So to get it down early you need to put in 3x. This could lead to resource glut of +2 a turn most likely in every game.. so that is good but it also means you are likely to draw it late game when it will be practically useless as it will not have time to profit.

By far a better way to go would be to assure command wins to earn resources that way. If you need a boots in this area Promotion seams a better card for me. Still I would say dump both those neutrals and go for a native or splash unit with high command icons and use that. You gain resources, it can kill units it dose everything Mine dose but more.


Because it is limited


Exactly, at best you can get 3 out in 3 turns. Then if you follow the math it takes 3 turns to do anything. The games are so short they simply can not pay themselves out in any meaningful way.

Edited by booored, 30 August 2014 - 05:57 AM.

"People should be less concerned about whether they are being insulted and more concerned if it is the truth"

#9 SynnerG

SynnerG

    Member

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 07:06 AM

I'd say there's a stronger argument for 3x Mine if you're running Conscripts for the attack boost, but this deck isn't running it, so it's a bit harder to say. Which is fine not running them because they can be expensive and don't have command icons. But then the deck isn't really playing to the strengths of IG for the most part. Elysian Assault Teams are great value/great surprise if your weenies are dying off. Captain Markis only works with IG units... are you going to be sacrificing those Leman Russ, or the very important Mortar Teams? That's what the Legionnaires are for, but aren't in this deck. The synergies might be there with the Ork stuff, but I'm just biased towards more mono decks and playing towards their built in strengths. Oh, and maybe it's a crutch, but I can't pass up Exterminatus, so this deck is also missing a clear card.


  • Wytefang likes this

#10 cgrater

cgrater

    Member

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 07:47 AM

I'd say there's a stronger argument for 3x Mine if you're running Conscripts for the attack boost, but this deck isn't running it, so it's a bit harder to say. Which is fine not running them because they can be expensive and don't have command icons. But then the deck isn't really playing to the strengths of IG for the most part. Elysian Assault Teams are great value/great surprise if your weenies are dying off. Captain Markis only works with IG units... are you going to be sacrificing those Leman Russ, or the very important Mortar Teams? That's what the Legionnaires are for, but aren't in this deck. The synergies might be there with the Ork stuff, but I'm just biased towards more mono decks and playing towards their built in strengths. Oh, and maybe it's a crutch, but I can't pass up Exterminatus, so this deck is also missing a clear card.

 

 

Mines may have a much better place in an AM deck because of the Conscripts.  Not sure whether that +1 attack for 3 units is worth the card slots, though.

 

Booored is *partially* correct on the math.  A late game mine is *not* worth it because it does not have time to pay out.  However, since they break even after one turn, there are several viable strategies with the Mine that makes it less awful than Booooored paints it as.

  • As a 1-cost unit that will repay itself next turn, you can use it to delay your actual deploys, forcing your opponent to deploy more units or pass, revealing his plans to you so you can plan the rest of your deploy phase better - this could even be viable late game.  Deploying after your opponent is pretty valuable, since you can better guess which planets he is going to contest.
  • Early game, the resource boost can be very helpful.  Mid-game is debatable, based on planet lineup.
  • Pumping conscripts

The "paying for itself" problem is not that dissimilar from Rogue Trader.  Trader *may* pay for itself on the same turn, but if the opponent drops a unit at the same planet, Rogue Trader may *never* pay for itself.  Given at least one turn, Mines will almost always pay for itself (at least until there is support destruction in the card pool).

 

Topdecking a Mines late game when you needed an answer to an opponents huge 8/8 basher is going to be frustrating, but no more frustrating than topdecking a 10th company scout / rogue trader / void pirate would be in that situation.

 

Running mines in your deck does mean that they will almost certainly be a mulligan condition.  No mines in opening hand? Mulligan.

 

Mines are not a fantastic card, but they are at least on par with Rogue Trader right now.  There are just not enough Limited cards in the card pool to cause that particular restriction to be much of a problem yet.  The payout vs rogue trader is slightly slower, but is guaranteed, whereas the trader can be contested or killed off before he pays out.

 

B(o3)red argues in favor of Promotion over either card.  This idea actually may have some merit.  Promotion is 0 cost, and provides better Command presence.  However, "fattie" decks (like the current Chaos) have a shortage of units that are really useful to drop at distant planets solely for the purpose of command struggles.  It is also possible to have a bad command layout.  I played one game last night where 3 of the 5 available planets were card draw with no resource and the other 2 were 1/1 (one of these was first planet).  Winning all 5 command struggles would only net 2 resources in a board like that.  Promotion could have helped win command struggles, but it would not have significantly alleviated the resource starvation.

 

  • Rogue Trader - resource acceleration, dependent on unopposed command struggle, vulnerable to destruction
  • Promotion - possible resource or card acceleration, depends on unopposed command struggle, planet with resources being available, costs 2 cards per use (1 unit plus promotion), attached unit is vulnerable to destruction
  • Mines - Safest, most reliable resource acceleration, takes slightly longer to pay off, nigh-invulnerable with current cardpool

 

I don't agree that mines are "terrible".  I think that your deck construction will determine which of the 3 is best to run.  A deck with a lot of high-cost units that plans on a "slow-roll" may be best off with the slightly slower, but more reliable Mines.


  • Wytefang, Kaic, BuzzsawMF and 1 other like this

#11 Wytefang

Wytefang

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,156 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 09:06 AM

mine is a terrible card... get rid of it.

 

 

 

Absolutely incorrect, imho.  It may not be great card for every deck type and it probably isn't as useful in 3x quantities as at 2x or 1x but it's hardly "terrible" - that's a bit too hyperbolic for my tastes.


Edited by Wytefang, 02 September 2014 - 09:08 AM.

"SHOW ME WHAT PASSES FOR FURY AMONGST YOUR MISBEGOTTEN KIND!"

 

W40K: Conquest LCG Facebook Page - https://www.facebook...35904116588456/

 


#12 kiwidru

kiwidru

    Member

  • Members
  • 31 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 09:33 AM

I agree with pretty much everything Cgrater stated, especially the importance of cheap drops in the deploy phase and how that allows you to place your units more advantageously.

 

Also, since all the -1 cost supports are unique and there are very few cards that interact with supports (squig bombs?), there is very little motivation to include more than one per deck, drawing a mine in later turns at least gives you the option of a cheap drop to bait out your opponents units. Additionally, they provide actual resource rather than reducing a units cost; which is generally the same since you will ideally be deploying units every turn, but is more valuable since it can be stored over turns/used on events/used on cross faction units as well if the situation arises. 

 

Those things being weighed: Are you able to massively 'mana-ramp' by dropping one per turn? Not really.

Does having one in your starting hand give you an almost impervious +25% resource per turn over the course of a game? Yes.


Edited by kiwidru, 02 September 2014 - 09:36 AM.

  • Wytefang likes this

#13 cgrater

cgrater

    Member

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 09:40 AM

 

I agree with pretty much everything Cgrater stated, especially the importance of cheap drops in the deploy phase and how that allows you to place your units more advantageously.

 

Also, since all the -1 cost supports are unique and there are very few cards that interact with supports (squig bombs?), there is very little motivation to include more than one per deck, drawing a mine in later turns at least gives you the option of a cheap drop to bait out your opponents units. Additionally, they provide actual resource rather than reducing a units cost; which is generally the same since you will ideally be deploying units every turn, but is more valuable since it can be stored over turns/used on events/used on cross faction units as well if the situation arises. 

 

Those things being weighed: Are you able to massively 'mana-ramp' by dropping one per turn? Not really.

Does having one in your starting hand give you an almost impervious +25% resource per turn over the course of a game? Yes.

 

My only disagreement is whether you should only run 1-of uniques.  Yes, they are unique, but they are also potent.  The resource-reducers are the *fastest* resource payoff (if you use them the turn you drop them, they are essentially free to play).  Getting one out early means that later pulls are "dead" draws, but it may still be worth it to have them in your decks.


Edited by cgrater, 02 September 2014 - 09:42 AM.

  • Wytefang likes this

#14 VermillionDe

VermillionDe

    Member

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 09:45 AM

  Getting one out early means that later pulls are "dead" draws, but it may still be worth it to have them in your decks.

 

 

Really wish these and the mines had a shield or two on them... that would really increase their usefulness.


  • Wytefang and Kaic like this

#15 kiwidru

kiwidru

    Member

  • Members
  • 31 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 10:19 AM

Agreed vermillion, and with Cgrater in principle on the uniques: it IS better to have them as early as possible and including multiples to achieve that isnt a terrible idea.

I guess the point i was getting at with the uniques is the diminishing returns factor: (percentages are approximated because 7 goes into 49 easier than 50).
If you include one copy of a card, it only has a 14% (28% if you are mulliganing for it) chance to be in your starting hand 
If you include 2 copies, you have a 28% (56%) chance of at least one being in your starting hand
If you include 3 copies, you have a 42% (84%) chance of at least one being in your starting hand

 

I believe we can all agree that if you are going to compare the two only from the turn they drop on, the uniques will usually pay you back better, due to the instant exhaustion... but you must also factor in What Turn you play them.

But, I also think we can all agree that having a mine even ONE turn prior to having the unique makes it superior in EVERY way, due to generating actual resource which is better than reducing cost on an in-faction unit.

 

I would MUCH rather have 3 mines in my deck, allowing them in 84% of my starting hands, than having 2 'dead' draws for the same percentages with the uniques... at that point you are basically reducing your useful mid-lategame draws by 2 for one resource the turn the card is played. Which, to me, is a very steep ancillary cost.



#16 cgrater

cgrater

    Member

  • Members
  • 29 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 01:02 PM

Just for funsies, I did some "ideal situation" math comparisons between Mines and the Unique Supports.

 

Assuming that games last a full 7 turns (not always, but it certainly can happen), in order to look at maximum output.  Also assuming that you draw all of your mines fast enough to play them on turns 1,2,3

 

  1. Pay 1 to drop (Mine or Unique).  Mine - 0 collected, Unique - 1 collected
  2. Pay 1 to drop second mine.  Mine - 1 collected (1 total).  Unique - 1 collected (2 total)
  3. Pay 1 to drop third mine.  Mine - 2 collected (3 total).  Unique - 1 collected (3 total)
  4. Mine - 3 collected (6 total).  Unique - 1 collected (4 total)
  5. Mine - 3 collected (9 total).  Unique - 1 collected (5 total)
  6. Mine - 2 collected (11 total).  Unique - 1 collected (6 total)
  7. Mine - 1 collected (12 total).  Unique - 1 collected (7 total)

In a 7 round game with perfect deploys, the Unique is worth a net of 6 resources, while a full set of mines is worth 9 net.

 

With a turn 1 play, the unique is actually better than a single mine (which nets 3), equal to 2 (net 6).  A Turn 1 Unique is only less efficient than Mines if all three mines are dropped by round 3 and the game lasts longer than 5 rounds.

 

I think, for high-cost decks, it might be worth it to run both mines *and* the unique, because the amount of potential resource acceleration is pretty dang nice.

 

For decks that have a lower cost curve, it might be better to run Rogue Trader and focus on command struggles, because they can also use the heavier card-draw from the struggle.


  • Wytefang likes this

#17 hoopjones

hoopjones

    Member

  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 01 October 2014 - 11:00 PM

Hey guys. We uploaded a bunch of gameplay videos the past two weeks!

 

Also, we are currently writing up some new articles for yall.

 

Enjoy!

 

http://teamsandcrawla.net/?cat=17






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS