sappidus

Members
  • Content count

    421
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About sappidus

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

290 profile views
  1. This typo made me laugh and laugh, in a good-natured way.
  2. While the refresh rate may or may not be instantaneous, I note that the boldfaced is not strictly true. ::puts on math hat:: The formula used is (n+1)/[(a+1)^2], with n denoting the # of likes/votes, and a the "age". I didn't drill into the code enough to learn the time units used, but it essentially doesn't matter for the current purpose; let's just assume it's measured in days (and fractions of days). So let's say Seastan put out his latest & greatest yesterday, and it's already earned 50 upvotes. Now I publish my newest Free Peoples deck, and I'm so eager to see whether it made the front page that I click reload instantly. What does the formula yield? Well, for trigger-happy me and my deck, it sees 0 votes for a 0-day-old list, so it spits out a value of (0+1)/[(0+1)^2] = 1. For Seastan's deck, it checks the age and gets back, say, 0.7321 days. So the score for the deck is (50+1)/[(0.7321+1)^2] = 51/3 = 17. Thus, even in the instant-update case, Seastan's beats mine despite mine being as new as possible. No one is surprised. (The actual numbers used on RingsDB may be different—I do not know whether the "n" from above is a straight count of hearts or whether it mixes in weighted stars or comments somehow—but the general principle remains.) Nonetheless, you are certainly correct that getting some early recognition helps immensely in getting onto, and sticking to, the front page: among other things, there's the exposure bias, that front-page decks are generally seen more and thus more likely to get further upvotes. But in the end, I'm mostly with @dalestephenson that the vast majority of decklists I check out are from some other kind of search, not just what's on the cover. (Some more info on ranking algorithms here… Y Combinator's is very similar to RingsDB's: https://moz.com/blog/reddit-stumbleupon-delicious-and-hacker-news-algorithms-exposed)
  3. Source: https://github.com/Sydtrack/ringsdb/blob/master/src/AppBundle/Model/DecklistManager.php Well, you asked. (It’s done by a relatively simple formula weighting the number of likes with the age of the decklist.)
  4. Isn't it still OK if you Desperate Alliance away your last hero, even without other characters? Although then playing this hypothetical Elrond's Counsel would require it being neutral and free... This is pretty far from the OP.
  5. By the partial fulfillment ruling... ...I'd say that what you ask should be allowed. Technically, however, that ruling came in the context of partial fulfillment of the EFFECT part of a COST->EFFECT.
  6. For the record, I think the letter-perfect reading is quite clear—the rules absolutely define what a "mulligan" is—and I am pleased by the consequences with respect to Thurindir, so I will not be the one to potentially disturb it with an official query.
  7. I'm bumping this because it actually countermands what a couple of people thought in an earlier thread… …and it also leads to a curious interaction I hadn't realized until now. From the core rules, step 5 of Setup (which happens after step 2, duh): This means that the side quest you tutored with Thurindir is kept safe and sound during a mulligan. Also, your starting hand after the first resource phase draw will be 8 cards, not the customary 7.
  8. I'm going to start telling newbies that EoDG is a print-on-demand quest they mistakenly included in the Core box.
  9. This is all sorts of amazing! I've often considered doing the same thing, but the sheer amount of busywork involved in doing it always put me off. I am really grateful you did this!
  10. This is a raging debate in/around the Netrunner community. A charitable (or is it apologetic?) perspective is that FFG is pulled in several directions for their games' core sets, and they chose to sacrifice a certain amount of recently-new player goodwill in order to Save the Game as a whole in the longer term. The whole LCG rotation thing is new to the company, and it remains to be seen whether they can pull it off.
  11. Cool question. This could be relevant for, e.g., the Daeron's Runes interaction: is the forced discard from cards #1/2, or #2/3? I think the response triggers before event card execution. Otherwise you'd have the odd issue of executing the entire text of a card, then adding some more (Doomed 1) and saying, oh yeah, do this Doomed thing too. Circumstantial evidence includes: * the FAQ distinction between "when" and "after" * the Dol Guldur Beastmaster erratum * the fact that the encounter card Doomed keyword triggers before most regular text on the card (Actually, I'm not so sure on that last point, although it does appear that way in Seastan's reveal guide. Anyone else have insight?)
  12. Perhaps equally important are the Core cards that are now getting rotating out that everyone thought would be evergreen. It's going to massively change the playstyles of certain factions. Imagine a new LotR core which yanked A Test of Will, Hasty Stroke, Northern Tracker, and Unexpected Courage from Spirit. That's basically what happened to the Anarch core cards. In any case, this being a co-op LCG makes it a different animal. Just thought it was worth a note.
  13. Indeed it can be argued, which is why I was mindful not to say that the issue was open and shut. I think it's worth an official query, though personally I have always played the situation according to Arkham's Razor. After all, I CAN always choose the worse one, ha.
  14. Mmmmm, careful: "each" in this game has to refer to >=1 instance. This was previously discussed here, among other places: The relevant official ruling is cited therein.