# Recent posts by necksnapper on Kongregate

 FBB is recruiting again! Apply now! http://www.kongregate.com/games/synapticon/tyrant?source=finv&kv_apply=219002 I am against this petition, I think it is good that less people buy an these packs for WBs. My auto fight deck is having trouble against these cards, not Joltrek himself though. Imperial Purger #12786Join | Status | Suggested decks Imperial Purger #12577Join | Status | Suggested decks 1, Because you always used Duncan with Havoc before. 2, Sand crawler would still die from poison after Executioner attacks, you must have used/imagined a card with swipe and crush. 3, You must have imagined the Jam animation on, it probably just failed its 50% roll to activate. Cards and skills never change, memories do. Imperial Purger #12349Join | Status | Suggested decks only join if you intend to go for full honor please Imperial Purger #11973Join | Status | Suggested decks Imperial Purger #11752Join | Status | Suggested decks we are all close to max honor need someone to finish this off Imperial Purger #11752Join | Status | Suggested decks translation from american maths to international: Originally posted by louster:Alright. So in lieu of a magical moderator reversion, here’s roughly what I’d written: I was trying to work out the general case of what win ratio I’d need to obtain for surging to be better than a given win ratio fighting, and it turns out that it’s pretty simple. Assuming perfect play – i.e. that you’ll either attain maximum points (45 surging, 25 fighting) or surrender (and thus effectively cost your side 10 points), then: ```45x – 10(1-x) = 25y – 10(1-y) 55x = 35y x = (7/11)y``` where y is the win ratio while fighting, and x is the win ratio surging you’d need to exceed to net more points. So, in the simplest case, where y = 1 (i.e. if you fight, you always win), then you need to win more than 63.63% surging to net more points. Similarly, if you win 91.67% fights, then you’d need to win more than 58.33% surges. Of course, perfect play is a fairly big assumption, but I suspect that if you try and take score variances into account, it probably affects both sides of the equation similarly enough to be negligible. - Or at least, that was my initial suspicion. I’ll write more below. (are US-americans able to compare fractions of different denominators to each other or do they/you just dont care how much larger one number is compared to the other?) Its kind of annoying that the quest gets delayed every day, and at the end you have missed a day (like Phileas Fogg :). But a fixed reset time can screw people too – those who only log in daily and just before the reset time, but screw them: +1 from me too Originally posted by BradPoker:I am fairly new to this game and I kinda like it, but making 6000 arena fights against a live opponent is simply crazy, I am a casual player and I like to collect the cards, but I just can’t see so me speding several hundred hours waiting before the oponent in a live fight finally plays his cards, it’s simply too time consuming and therefore really frustrating – especially if you are new and didn’t ever get the chance to get up to 5000 wins when the arena was un-live. Thanks. Devs require you to have botting skills to acquire those achievements, its about time you start realizing this game is developed for bots. Imperial Purger #11517Join | Status | Suggested decks | ? Imperial Purger #11300Join | Status | Suggested decks | ? Imperial Purger #10955Join | Status | Suggested decks | ? I would like to be a paid user too Ok, my point is not if it is OO or not, since everyone is getting stuck on that I am updating OP based on the feedback.. sure you can do it without object oriented programming too, but with object oriented programming it comes by itself. If you are not a tyrant developer, skip to the last line. { If you re-use the same functions at different places, you save time and decreases the risk of bugs. An example could be a tournament you can have a function that calculates the rewarded gold that you call regardless if it is for display purpose (and where) of for rewarding the gold, with the same input data. An example of not doing that is when THREE different functions are used to calculate the same thing at different places, and they all give different results. For example the “PAST TOURNAMENT” summary displays Card (no gold) as reward, the “REWARDS:” summary shows 50% 3.500 gold, and when clicking claim rewards it shows 3.577 gold. In this case I ask myself, how much was actually added to my stack of gold, should I assume that the last one of the 3 previous functions was used for that calculation, or is it a FOURTH function that manage to find yet another method to calculate the same thing differently. Now I do have some understanding for calculating this wrong, because summing up the total pot, scraping of 30% and then dividing it into different portions to different amounts of players in the different reward groups is after all not an elementary thing – SO, WHY REDO IT THREE TIMES?? } TL;DR does it exist in tyrant? Imperial Purger #10525Join | Status | Suggested decks | ? just spend it! collect 1 of each card you dont have, buy some HW too, buy in to every tourney even if you dont have time to play, it might get you another capacitor and closer to heracles without any effort. If devs get the idea that gold is building up faster than it is spent theyll just start selling crap reward cards for 100k again – so spend it fast! 250k is a good buffer to keep, that allows you to buy a 10×25k spam deck or buy 4 HW at (a small) discount when buying in to a tourney. Imperial Purger #10154Join | Status | Suggested decks | ? If an optimal strategy in this game did not require sleeping in 90 minute intervals there would probably be less botting, devs are asking for it. When using multiple (im not talking about 1 or 2 alts here) accounts in coordination, thats when the real problem comes (and this kind of requires botting). Imperial Purger #9924Join | Status | Suggested decks | ? as above I just played a sealed tournament game which bugged out and played on auto, then reloaded the game client. Then I got the question to continue the game and it had only played one round, although I had seen the opponents entire deck! To me this confirms that my game client knows my opponents deck beforehand. If my client know there are ppl that know this too, THIS IS NOT OK. I wouldn’t be surprised if it also showed the order of the opponents and my own deck too if I had paid attention, but I cant confirm this. I realize this is probably not news to some, but everyone deserves to know.