Recent posts by billiska on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Heroes of the Realm / Suggestions

There should be a marker on which formula you don’t care to use.
The main reason for this is to make ‘Exclude heros used in formula’ check box more complete.
The heroes in ignored formula will not be exluded by the check box.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Kongregate Multiplayer Games / [BattleCraft] ideas about what you want to be added to battlecraft

A filter in skirmish for the active entires that you still need to do something.
For example, those that you haven’t challenged all the fights yet
and those that you haven’t modified the deck from default.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Kongregate Multiplayer Games / [BattleCraft] Q:Tie breaking in skirmish

I assume that if multiple players have highest number of win,
the winner is the one with more “points”.
See “Basic Skirmish 0297” for example, where 3 people tie at 8 wins each.

But I don’t know how the “points” are calculated/what they actually represent.
Anyone care to enlighten me?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Berserk: The Cataclysm / A few Suggestions for Improved UI

Read the suggestion roughly.
Agree with point #2 completely, but partly agree for others.
But hey, that point #5 makes me feel like replying.

I can’t be the only one that doesn’t like grinding right?
As I remembered when tyrant introduced crafting, a lot of people responded negatively.
Or maybe instead of ‘want some grinding’ you meant to say ‘want something to do and/or want something to earn imps’.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Berserk: The Cataclysm / Bug reports

my little dragon was at 2/4 HP
the turn begins, 2 important action happen at this point, I don’t know which one is first:
1) insatiable blade is equiped to the dragon.
2) troll shaman comes into my field.
the battle plays quickly,
but at the end my dragon has 8 HP.

this shouldn’t be possible, the max HP should be 6.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Berserk: The Cataclysm / Info about attacking friend's land

I just confirm these:
1. you can open portal to your friend’s land.
(In my case it happened because I added him as friend after the portal is chosen.)
2. if that happens you can not attack him.
3. you can attack him again if you unfollow him on Kong.

Maybe it’s a common knowledge but I don’t see anyone mention it in chat.
If someone get a portal chosen to be one of the current friend please reply below.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Berserk: The Cataclysm / Bug reports

I suspect there is a concurrency bug:
2 players A & B is invading player C’s island.
(I’m ‘A’ on the invading side.)

It’s shown that I’ve conquered a particular piece of land.
Then I went to invade another piece.
When come back to C’s island map again. it’s shown that B has conquered the island.

Of course, this could mean that C liberated the island from A. Then B conquered it.
But I doubt that is the case here because of the following:
- C doesn’t seem to be liberating other island pieces at all.
- C’s garrison deck is a beginner’s forest deck and the island is small. implying he should be a beginner.
which shouldn’t be able to so quickly liberate the island against me (with 350+ cards at the time.)

So I guess it could be that the game’s system allow 2 player to start conquering the same piece of land at the same time?
Thanks.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Berserk: The Cataclysm / Bug reports

Thanks for reply.
I should try running this on firefox instead then.
just FYI, the mem leak eats up to 3GB in my case.

And wait does this mean it’s for ALL chrome, no matter what platform?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Berserk: The Cataclysm / Bug reports

I suspect huge memory leak.
but then again, I’m using flash on chrome on linux64 which I think making the effect more apparent.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Berserk: The Cataclysm / FAQ: Attack types & Extra Damages

Some comment that helps reading the chart:
The left side is the +1 extra damage.

The right side doesn’t have anything to do with extra damage.
My own guess is that:
red arrow = that element contains cards which win over the other element.
green arrow = these element contains cards that go well with each other.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Clash of the Dragons / [Petition] Stop the PM Spam

or simply make it so you’re able to filter?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / How to do HW tournaments

I’ll be capt. obvious and say:

- fear (venorax, shaded hollow) + crush (clipper) + first turn preemption (blitz) + relin. power

- engulf chasm + low delay

what’s the point of this post again?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / disconnect from kong chat to stop page refreshing bug

credit to soleunit.
putting it here so people have more chance to see.

The way I disconnect:
Open another kong chat in another tab/window.
The chat in the first tab/window will be disconnected.
You then close the second tab/window and continue enjoy your game.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Tyrant Errors

Originally posted by soleunit:
Originally posted by Sophisanmus:

Page spontaneously refreshes mid-game, and fails to reload unless this auto-refresh is stopped and the page is re-loaded manually.

The bug occurs on chat message. I think Kongregate makes a bug advertisement on chat… It makes this bug.
You can play game without this bug if you don’t look the chat message.

Thanks a lot, disable/disconnect from chat and the problem is gone.
For those above who is a little bit too literal with his advice,
you can try to disconnect from chat by opening another kong chat in another tab/window.
The chat in the first tab/window will be disconnected.
You then close the second tab/window and continue enjoy your game.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Simulation] 100% Card Set Completion

Good post. Some comment:

1. Fewest packs purchased & most packs purchased aren’t informative.
We all know fewest pack purchase is always #rares+#legen and most packs purchased is unbounded.

2. Holy shit simulation… I would have been thinking of how to solve for average while you already finished writing program. ha.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / tyrant packs are a bitch.

From some calculation:
Picking 1 rare/legendary card at random,
the chance that you will not get that particular card even after buying the first 75 packs is around 10%.
And the chance that you will not get it even after buying the first 150 packs is around 1%.
And the chance that you will not get it even after buying the first X packs is 100*((33-1)/33)^X %.

Assumptions:
1. All rare and legendary cards have equal chance of appearing in a pack, that is one of those per pack.
2. Total number of rare + legendary in standard set is 33. (I might count it wrong).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / So, yeah.

Originally posted by warrior9694:

coolstorybro?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / How is this deck in the post-Phobos meta?

Just adding one point.
Pantheon Progeny will not be able to display its valor in this kind of deck.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / special pack for 15?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but vault doesn’t have legendary like in a pack, right?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / No play tournaments

We’re not getting paid WB for thinking hard about all this are we?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / No play tournaments

Originally posted by warrior9694:
Originally posted by billiska:
Originally posted by warrior9694:

how about they rank idlers by global rating? someone with a higher global rating will be ranked higher then others with the same score. seems fair considering your technically better then them and it actually adds a value to global rating(besides bragging rights of course).

How about no.
Because global rating currently combines both sealed and standard tourney.

and thats relevant because why again?

because being better in global rating
(for instance, play and win a lot of standard tourneys but not playing sealed tourney at all)
doesn’t means he should get better rating in a particular tourney
(for instance, an enclave tourney)

Sorry the language in my last post is too blunt.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / No play tournaments

Originally posted by ElCrapio:
You probably already realized that this suggestion is bad as people shouldn’t be forced to not remain idle in tyrant the whole duration of tourney, right? Or maybe I just misunderstood the sentence.
Anyway, a much simpler way would be imposing a minimum number of match you need to play.
The final rating = (current rating) – 10*(# of matches lacked if any)
How does that sounds?

I don’t mean that you have to keep playing one fight after the other. I mean that if half an hour (or whatever) passes without fighting a single fight lose some points. And nobody’s forcing anybody. If you have 1040 in the first 20 minutes and decide to camp it out, you should expect to have your score lowered to make way for those who actually play.

Now I see your point a lot clearer.
That would indeed be against people who aim to score early and just wait it out.
But, would still be against people who just busy and can not play in the next hour as well.
Sure, one could say “if you’re joining 2h tourney, you need to have 2h free time”.
But I imagine the number of participants will drop.

If I’m to judge my own suggestion the same way, it will be that “if you’re joining a 2h tourney, you need to play at least 10 matches”.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / No play tournaments

Originally posted by warrior9694:

how about they rank idlers by global rating? someone with a higher global rating will be ranked higher then others with the same score. seems fair considering your technically better then them and it actually adds a value to global rating(besides bragging rights of course).

How about no.
Because global rating currently combines both sealed and standard tourney.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / No play tournaments

Originally posted by glumble:


My friend actually lost top 25% by 1 place, to a guy who was tied with him but had an earlier kong id.

This case definitely needs to be fixed.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / No play tournaments

Originally posted by ElCrapio:

At the beginning it’s easier to win because everybody is giving their decks a go. You can easily get up to 1030 without a good deck, and then camp and wait for your top 25. Later on you fight mostly against good decks so sometimes you can end even below 1030 while trying, even if you did a lot better than those guys who sat there in the beginning.

I was thinking of making a guide about how to get the most out of sealed tourney.
As you said, fighting at the first 50mins of 2h tourney has more chance of meeting weaker opponent.

Ranking aside, it seems that rating of 1000 is always in the bottom 50%.
Of course this is not set in the rule, and it depends on the actual distribution of rating.
But it seems to be the case every time.

And you know what, from my experience, rating of 1001 is always in the next 25%.
Not too surprising, considering that your opponent gets always get the negative change in rating that you get.
And also the fact that things in nature are usually normally distributed.

tr;dr
0/0 people usually get worst prize, so nothing wrong with that.

Originally posted by ElCrapio:

I think it should be an incentive against camping… such as subtraction of points depending on how long you remain idle.

You probably already realized that this suggestion is bad as people shouldn’t be forced to not remain idle in tyrant the whole duration of tourney, right? Or maybe I just misunderstood the sentence.
Anyway, a much simpler way would be imposing a minimum number of match you need to play.
The final rating = (current rating) – 10*(# of matches lacked if any)
How does that sounds?