Close

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30
  1. #21
    Senior Member qaz92zaq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NJ GMT -5
    Posts
    1,502
    Tournaments Joined
    4
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bobrossw View Post
    I kind of like this definition, it's very simple and straightforward, and tempo has always been something that's hard for me to put my finger on in this game. You brought up an issue with it - how does fireball count into tempo (especially when used against the hero)?

    I think to reconcile those, I might just define tempo as "how close you are to winning - assuming the opponent doesn't do anything to stop you." Which would then include your definition in most cases, but would also include things like your opponent's low health. It also makes sense of how certain one turn kill decks can seemingly be generating very little tempo for much of the game and then explode into a win. Since their win-con consists of things like "having 8 resources and bad santa in hand." or "having 6+ locations and portal in hand." Assembling pieces of those then counts towards their tempo - whereas having a stack of 6 locations may be irrelevant to another deck's tempo regardless of who controls them.

    Anyway I'm not done reading, just thought I'd bring that up for consideration...nice read so far!
    I don't quite agree about combo deck tempo (at least in SE). The reason being that there are not really much in the way of response tools to most combo components, so the combo deck is not actually the one dictating the flow of the game. Combo decks win by breaking the conventional rules imo, and are basically always behind on tempo. Think of them as a control deck taken to an extreme. In a control deck you start out being the reactive player, until you are ready to become the active one and now your opponent has to try (and usually fail to) react to you. A combo deck works on the same principle, but does not give your opponent any reaction time.

    As for Cait's definition I feel it is a bit too simplified, but not a bad way of putting an actual value on something that is more of a concept than really tangible. I feel it doesn't work for things like draw engines though. For example if I play IGG, based off Cait's definition I have 4 tempo points and be in more control of the game than if I had a Jasmine on the board. Imo this is completely not true. IGG should count as basically 0 tempo points because it does nothing to dictate the course of the game on its own. The hope is that the tempo loss will be off set by the card advantage generated in the long term.

  2. #22
    Senior Member bobrossw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    2,406
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Just another general comment - Caitlyn prioritizes Tempo and discusses it as the main concern in the game, however I would contend that it is a matter of personal taste and style. Cait's preferred playstyle is one that emphasizes tempo, and there's nothing wrong with that, but it's also possible to emphasize card advantage and board control over tempo (i.e. a control deck). Even in those cases, tempo is important (if only in the interest of limiting your opponent's tempo), however it's not the primary concern. I'm just pointing that out because I think following Caitlyn's prescriptions here will lead towards solid aggro and mid-range decks but might work against you if you're trying to make a control deck.
    IGN: ETC BobRoss
    "BobRoss puts the 'bRo' in Boss" - Gondorian
    Proud Member of ETC - Errors Terrors & Carers
    Europe/Africa Regional Champion 2014 (also top 8 in World Championship)
    See some videos with commentary of some of my Serena Games on Shadowera.net
    I also do a video show with TJ SamuelJ - Bob and Sam Trollin it Up!

  3. #23
    Senior Member qaz92zaq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NJ GMT -5
    Posts
    1,502
    Tournaments Joined
    4
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bobrossw View Post
    Just another general comment - Caitlyn prioritizes Tempo and discusses it as the main concern in the game, however I would contend that it is a matter of personal taste and style. Cait's preferred playstyle is one that emphasizes tempo, and there's nothing wrong with that, but it's also possible to emphasize card advantage and board control over tempo (i.e. a control deck). Even in those cases, tempo is important (if only in the interest of limiting your opponent's tempo), however it's not the primary concern. I'm just pointing that out because I think following Caitlyn's prescriptions here will lead towards solid aggro and mid-range decks but might work against you if you're trying to make a control deck.
    To be fair to her she wrote this back in CotC, the fact that more comeback mechanics exist now makes this slightly less important. Still I would argue she is correct in that tempo has a bigger role in a SE deck than it would in a similar deck of a different game just because of the way allies can control the board with first strike.

    That being said as you mentioned control decks are not nearly as reliant on their own tempo, because they are built to disrupt their opponent's tempo instead, while building up for a late game advantage.

  4. #24
    Senior Member highmystica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    653
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Caitlyn0 View Post
    (MILL - the ability to remove the others players deck in a speedy manner so they have no options and run out of cards)
    Um, I'm confused. I remember the CotC version of Millstalker - lol.

  5. #25
    Senior Member bobrossw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    2,406
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by highmystica View Post
    Um, I'm confused. I remember the CotC version of Millstalker - lol.
    Mill comes from an old Magic the Gathering card called "Millstone" that would discard cards from the opponent's deck. It resulted in decks that aimed to win by making the opponent run out of cards rather than health. Now the general strategy of having "run out of cards" as the win-con is called Mill. Sometimes people differentiate between mill and stall, where mill represents discarding from the deck (like Praxix), and stall involves drawing cards and drawing out the game (like Millstalker - aka Moonstaller or stalladar).
    IGN: ETC BobRoss
    "BobRoss puts the 'bRo' in Boss" - Gondorian
    Proud Member of ETC - Errors Terrors & Carers
    Europe/Africa Regional Champion 2014 (also top 8 in World Championship)
    See some videos with commentary of some of my Serena Games on Shadowera.net
    I also do a video show with TJ SamuelJ - Bob and Sam Trollin it Up!

  6. #26
    Senior Member bobrossw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    2,406
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by qaz92zaq View Post

    That being said as you mentioned control decks are not nearly as reliant on their own tempo, because they are built to disrupt their opponent's tempo instead, while building up for a late game advantage.
    Yeah, I'm not really arguing with Caitlyn there, just pointing out some nuances for the noobs in case they're interested. Tempo always matters, but you can make it a secondary or tertiary priority and still have a winning deck.
    IGN: ETC BobRoss
    "BobRoss puts the 'bRo' in Boss" - Gondorian
    Proud Member of ETC - Errors Terrors & Carers
    Europe/Africa Regional Champion 2014 (also top 8 in World Championship)
    See some videos with commentary of some of my Serena Games on Shadowera.net
    I also do a video show with TJ SamuelJ - Bob and Sam Trollin it Up!

  7. #27
    Senior Member Caitlyn0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    5,664
    Tournaments Joined
    2
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by qaz92zaq View Post
    I don't quite agree about combo deck tempo (at least in SE). The reason being that there are not really much in the way of response tools to most combo components, so the combo deck is not actually the one dictating the flow of the game. Combo decks win by breaking the conventional rules imo, and are basically always behind on tempo. Think of them as a control deck taken to an extreme. In a control deck you start out being the reactive player, until you are ready to become the active one and now your opponent has to try (and usually fail to) react to you. A combo deck works on the same principle, but does not give your opponent any reaction time.

    As for Cait's definition I feel it is a bit too simplified, but not a bad way of putting an actual value on something that is more of a concept than really tangible. I feel it doesn't work for things like draw engines though. For example if I play IGG, based off Cait's definition I have 4 tempo points and be in more control of the game than if I had a Jasmine on the board. Imo this is completely not true. IGG should count as basically 0 tempo points because it does nothing to dictate the course of the game on its own. The hope is that the tempo loss will be off set by the card advantage generated in the long term.
    of course it is simple, this is for beginner's and intermediate players, but this is also for advanced players. that is also why they are sidebars its great to help them get a mental grasp (and possibly a mental image) of game tempo.

    as for your IGG example, i would argue that it is "4 points" of tempo on the board as it is another card in play. the more you have in olay the beetter and as a draw engine, it helps you gain more potential tempo with the extra cards. it has an effect the moment it is played, not in terms of what is going on in the game, but in terms of affecting what you opponent does next. which is HUGE. they know they have to get rid of it or they are in trouble.

    and for your conrol example, i would argue the control deck is always working on gaining tempo, mainly by "destroying" your opponents tempo. say they cast a 3cc ally and you respond with now you're mine, a 2cc card. they lost 3 to your 2 and you both lost a card.
    Last edited by Caitlyn0; 07-04-2016 at 11:00 AM.
    lil dark riding hood Queen of A1 Evolution in Theory
    Alliance One recruitment thread
    RED
    my EPIC videos
    Evolution in Theory
    SE Card Price Guide - My Deck Building Guide
    all my decks together
    owner of Earthen Protector flavor text
    Caitlyn™: collecting rage quits since 2011

    Evolution in Theory

  8. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    16
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    nice writeup
    pleasant to read

  9. #29
    Senior Member highmystica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    653
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Cool read, even if a little dated, almost tempted to run a few hands with a pure cotc deck ... almost

  10. #30
    Senior Member Caitlyn0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    5,664
    Tournaments Joined
    2
    Tournaments Won
    0
    im glad people are still enjoying this and getting something out of it
    lil dark riding hood Queen of A1 Evolution in Theory
    Alliance One recruitment thread
    RED
    my EPIC videos
    Evolution in Theory
    SE Card Price Guide - My Deck Building Guide
    all my decks together
    owner of Earthen Protector flavor text
    Caitlyn™: collecting rage quits since 2011

    Evolution in Theory

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •