Recent posts by zz1000zz on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: GemCraft - Chasing Shadows / Without the Magician's Pouch...

Oh, right. I totally forgot that comparing a grade 6 to grade 7 gem wouldn’t be right because grade 7 is the breakpoint for those bonuses. Those results make a lot more sense now.

And yeah, I’m nowhere near the point where I need to worry about that. I’m only level 420 right now, though I do have 327 achievements unlocked. And four skill points bought because I kept getting more shadow cores than I’d spend. I doubt I’ll buy many more though.

I think for now I’ll just keep grinding some levels so I can hit 500 or so then try some talisman farming. It’s weird to me that I’m still using tier two talismans. I know i probably won’t be able to get the best talismans yet, but even just a few useful tier 4/5 ones would be a really nice boost.

 
Flag Post

Topic: GemCraft - Chasing Shadows / Without the Magician's Pouch...

Huh, I feel like I must be doing something wrong. I followed one of the gemweaving strategies in that link, the 16c one for manafarming, and it produced a grade 4 gem with the exact same mana value as a grade 5. So I built a grade 5 gem with just a normal combination of the two colors, and it came up with slightly higher stats and slightly lower special modifiers. I could see the value of that, but when I then upgraded both gems twice, the simpler recipe wound up with higher stats and higher special modifiers.

I don’t think gemweaving is supposed to result in me spending the same amount of mana for a worse gem just so it can be a grade lower, but I also don’t know why the more complicated approach would give worse stats in the long run.

 
Flag Post

Topic: GemCraft - Chasing Shadows / Without the Magician's Pouch...

Thanks. I had actually seen that page before, but I didn’t see the level formula because I searched for lvl, not lv, so I only found entries using gem levels.

So assuming I did things correctly, it looks like I need ~125 million XP to hit level 500, ~1 billion XP to hit level 1000 and ~27 billion to hit level 3000. That’s not as bad as I expected. I’ve already starting picking up 2 million or more XP from levels without chain hit or bound gems (currently at wizard level 385), so level 1000 should be pretty easy to reach. It’ll just be a matter of going back and replaying levels.

I think once I’ve hit 1000 or so, I’ll have to see about improving me game though. I still haven’t used any gem weaving yet. I hear it makes a big difference. Especially since by the time I hit 1000, I’ll probably want to start using traps more.

 
Flag Post

Topic: GemCraft - Chasing Shadows / Without the Magician's Pouch...

Sorry for the triple post, but does anyone know the formula for how much experience it takes to level? I was wanting to see how much experience I’d need to get to levels 1k, 1.5k and 2k, but I couldn’t find the formula on the wiki.

 
Flag Post

Topic: GemCraft - Chasing Shadows / Without the Magician's Pouch...

Oh god, I just saw the Fury skill. That thing is crazy good. Why does it have to be excluded for non-premium users? That skill alone could probably increasing my XP totals by 50+% right now.

 
Flag Post

Topic: GemCraft - Chasing Shadows / Without the Magician's Pouch...

Thanks for the answer. I hadn’t considered that unlocking the Magician’s Pouch could make things more difficult, though now that I think about it, it makes sense. The pouch would make the earlier portions of the game significantly easier, but the additional difficulty (and battle traits) would let you make for a more difficult lategame.

Anyway, I think I’ll stick with this for a bit and see how things go. I don’t know how much I’ll enjoy the level grinding, but going through the stages hunting achievements is kind of fun right now. I’m up to ~300, so I’m making good progress. I still need to beat a ton of levels on Glaring though for the bonus skill points.

Oh, and do the vision fields. I hate those things.

 
Flag Post

Topic: GemCraft - Chasing Shadows / Without the Magician's Pouch...

How high a level can you get? I finally beat this game, and I was thinking about playing on a bit, but I was wondering how important the Magician’s Pouch really is. Not being able to get bound gems, chain hit gems, Endurance mode or even Haunting difficulty seems like a big obstacle, but at the same time, I hit level 300 before beating the game without much difficulty.

So how high a level could I realistically reach without buying the Magician’s Pouch? And would it be worth the trouble? I think the game is more fun when you have limitations that stop it from being stupidly easy, so I kind of like the restrictions, but… I don’t know.

 
Flag Post

Topic: War of Omens / Ritual Slaughter and Scrivener bug

Scrivener gives you one resource whenever a Ritual is cast, even if the thing has no effect. Are you sure that’s not what you’re seeing? It’d only be a bug if you’re getting more than one resource off this.

 
Flag Post

Topic: War of Omens / A Funny Thing Happened

I would have probably died of laughter if the game hadn’t crashed. I can’t imagine what it’d have looked like to see that many attacks proc all at once!

 
Flag Post

Topic: War of Omens / A Funny Thing Happened

Hey guys. Today I was playing Metris with Valdorian against some Master difficulty AI when I was shocked to find I had gone infinite thanks to a Charlatan my Lackey restocked. I had never thought about it, but Charlatan lets you go infinite against any Vespitole deck if they have resource production spells (it can take quite a bit of gold to get started, of course).

Anyway, I decided to run with it because another Lackey had also restocked an Apothecary, and I thought it’d be fun to kill the opponent that way instead of feeding a Militia. I went overboard with it because I was curious how much overkill I could get. You can see the results here:

http://youtu.be/4Mz4-vFOp94

One thing I forgot to show in that video is the back row is a row of Knights. In retrospect, I probably should have made my entire field either Knights or Arsenics because it’d look cooler. I’m not sure it’d have matter though. As you can see in that video, my game was lagging even while it was my turn. It couldn’t handle things when I ended my turn so the game crashed.

Still, I thought it was pretty cool. I know people could make decks to do weird things like this, but there’s something awesome about it just happening without you meaning for it to.

I’d still like to know how much overkill you can get though.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Weekly CP Bug

According to the game, I’ve racked up 4,931 CP in the last two and a half days. I’ve done this despite being VIP 0 (meaning I can’t donate gold). This is obviously a bug.

When the game was changed to stop resetting weekly CP with maintenance, things got buggy. Instead of simply not doing anything to weekly CP with maintenance, maintenance somehow rolled back everyone’s weekly CP to what it was prior to the Tuesday reset. This has happened twice now.

The effect of this is weekly CP values will rise and rise indefinitely (except between Tuesday’s reset and Wednesday’s maintenance, where they’ll act properly). By next week, I’ll be able to have seven thousand weekly CP. The week after that, nine or ten thousand.

I’ve been told each time the CP values get reset one’s total CP is increased by a corresponding amount. If that’s true, every week’s CP will count again for the total with each successive week. Donate now, and it will count this week, next week, the week after, the week after and the week after. Donating 250 CP now would mean increasing your guild’s total by 1,000 for the month.

Someone should verify whether or not that’s true. If it is, this bug is insane. If it isn’t, the bug is still horrible. Without a weekly reset of CP, the guilds who contribute the most CP in the first few weeks will never lose their weekly spot. My guild currently has ~60k weekly CP. The 20th guild in weekly rankings has ~80k. Even if my guild managed to generate 10k more CP than that guild does this week, they’d still be guaranteed a spot in the showdown.

As it stands, there are guilds who could contribute no CP at all this week and still wind up with a spot in the showdown. That’s stupid. And so is this bug. Instead of fixing a problem by having maintenance simply do nothing to weekly CP, you guys have somehow made maintenance break the CP system.

Even worse? You guys probably wouldn’t ever notice unless somebody complained.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Bosses and their tactics

I see you also fixed a couple errors I pointed out. For some reason though, you still have not gotten Shimmering Cave right. It’s kind of funny. deathvonduel is the one who specifically pointed out the error that still remains. That means you’ve still only corrected the errors I’ve pointed out, failing to correct the errors anyone else points out. Of course, you haven’t given me credit for anything you’ve corrected :P

To be clear, stage two of Shimmering Cave does not use any units with Counterattack or Poison.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Gold

Originally posted by GETH83:

activity rewards 15 gold a day x 7 days = 105g
ascension tower lvl 45 every week= 96g
50 PvP battles a week = 20g

= 221 gold a week u dont even have to be lucky to get

It may not take luck if you have the right decks, but clearing 45 floors of the tower is not easy for most players.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / High Lady Kuri Takes the Field!

Again the promotion for this event lists the wrong ring. The ring actually gives Hero Crit, not Hero HP.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Bosses and their tactics

Hard bosses are different, including having more cards, but that’s not relevant here. The cards and stats listed make it clear this guide is for Hard difficulty, not Normal.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Bosses and their tactics

Another error for Dark Forest:

Special Units Virulent Bat King (+5 poison dmg if unit is dmg by normal attack when that units turn ends)

The Virulent Bat King in Dark Forest has Decay 7, not Decay 5.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Bosses and their tactics

I was doing Dark Forest earlier, and I noticed this is wrong:

Storm Lizard King (Stun+AOE+Armor 4)

It has five armor, not four.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Bosses and their tactics

Originally posted by Destructible13:

Stop your complaining about the post above yours and get on with life!

Why in the world would you tell someone who hasn’t posted in almost two weeks to stop posting certain things? To stop doing something I’m not doing, I’d have to start doing it. That means you’re not just baiting me, you’re demanding I engage in behavior you suggest is bad.

Originally posted by XxSirCarlosxX:

Can we also have all of zz1000zz’s condescending posts deleted as well? Everything about this thread is awesome. Except him and his childish behavior.

It’s funny you’d claim the only childish things here are my posts while asking for my posts to be deleted. It’s hard to imagine much more childish than censoring people because you don’t like what they have to say.

Out of curiosity, how do you people complaining about my behavior feel about the fact my behavior is the only reason a mistake in this guide got fixed? fg109 pointed out the skills listed for Shimmering Cave were wrong. The topic creator responded to him, saying he’d look into it, but never did. I pointed out the same problem, using a combative tone, and that led to it getting fixed.

deathvonduel pointed out the units for Shimmering Cave were wrong. The topic creator responded to him, but he didn’t comment on the issue. The mistake in the guide hasn’t been fixed. The use of a nice tone didn’t work. While you can say whatever you want about me and my posts, they’re the only reason any mistake in the guide has been fixed.

Originally posted by Destructible13:
Originally posted by ddsw1b:

I found the guild nice, as a quick overview of what each boss has.
You could add that sanguine tribe stage 2 and windy cliff stage 2 have ALL physical damage

Sanguine Tribe Stage 2 does not have all physical damage, fire damage is included in some of Clamour’s spells.

She was referring to damage dealt to player units, the only damage anyone would really care about. The only skills that deal fire damage in that stage are buffs put on the enemy units. They have no affect on player units, meaning Dread Phantoms will never take more than one damage from a skill in that stage.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Walls

Originally posted by Gambaro:

Seizan: Noob is an abbreviation for newbie, which mean just newcomer.

No, it’s not. Noob is distinct from newb, and it is used as a pejorative the way Seizan_7 used it. Every time you use the word “noob” to refer to someone, you are insulting them.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Game Mechanic Change Suggestion

Originally posted by shin89:

Wow….I make up things, but you take a sentence out of it’s contest to answer me….when you critic me, I explain myself, when I critic you, you answer that I make up things and you don’t explain what I ask you to explain….I can be a child, I can be wrong, but I tried to add something to this topic, accepting critics and thinking about new ideas. You proposed 1 thing and then defended it to death, giving no further explanation when I asked you about block. You don’t explain your ideas: you just want to attack the others: it’s pointless to discuss ideas with a person that, be you smart or not, doesn’t want to find solutions, but only more arguments.

I have no idea what you just said. Maybe this made sense when you were writing it, but most people know if you want people to know what you’re referring to, it helps to quote it. Or at least describe it in enough detail they can readily spot it. As it stands, I doubt there’s a person alive who could figure it out.

Enjoy your attitude, I tried to speak your own language, now I will ignore you.

You say, immediately before making another comment to ask me:

Try it at home: how long did it take?

Interesting behavior. Normally when one says they’re going to ignore a person, they don’t immediately ask that person a direct question. Also, when one says a “fork must be added,” they usually don’t write pseudocode that doesn’t involve a fork at all. Then again, when a person says a routine must be added, they usually provide code for a routine, which you didn’t do.

To answer your question, I have no idea how long it takes to implement code that is neither a fork nor routine yet claim it is both. I suspect it would take a bit of time to either consume enough alcohol or bang your head against the wall enough times for it to make sense.

Originally posted by kevinke6:

Pure entertainment: the 2 people who agreed on me being an idiot in such discussions are now quarrelling against each other and accusing each other of being a child

I never called you an idiot. I said your posts in a topic were stupidly written to the point of being incomprehensible. While you might find that insulting, it is only a comment on your posts, not you.

It’d help your case if you took the time to get the little things right.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Game Mechanic Change Suggestion

Originally posted by shin89:

Wow…man, you are acting like a child. Ok, you can have one more big answer.

I noticed you say this about a lot of people you disagree with in this forum. Either you’re way more mature than people, or you make this accusation more than you should. Given the pettiness of some of your comments, I’d wager it’s the latter. For example:

I said that your idea can be implemented in the same time than mine. But then you have to fix blocks, so I did not contradict myself, read better.

Read better? Seriously? There’s no justification for a comment like that unless you’re trying to be petty.

Not only that, but the insult is based upon a total misrepresentation. You randomly claimed “you have to fix blocks” to implement my idea, and I responded that there is no reason for such – my idea doesn’t require any change in blocks. You responded, saying you “did not contradict” yourself, but nobody ever claimed you did. That means you’re telling me to “read harder” while responding to things I never said. You continue to make things up by saying:

Unless you give me a solution that you have ALREADY explained in this thread and that I did not understand, you are just wrong according to your own criteria.

I never gave a criterion for what is “just wrong.” Of course my system doesn’t just cancel out blocks. I never said otherwise. I never suggested the fact it can do more than cancel blocks is a bad thing. You’re fabricating a claim for me just so you can say I contradict myself and my system is bad.

A new function….man, I was bullying you, fixing a 100% crit is soooo easy….you don’t need a new function, you just call the damage function giving it 1 instead of the random number. A fork takes less than 20 seconds, so you did not contradict me….

First, it’s funny you said I’m acting like a child but here you flat-out say you were bullying me.

Second, you now randomly claim the damage function accepts a random number as input when there’s no reason to believe it does. There’s no reason to think a damage function would calculate the chance of critical hits. That would make the function more bulky than is necessary.

Third, I did contradict you. A fork like I described would never be coded in just twenty seconds. You’re randomly saying I didn’t contradict you on a point when I explicitly contradicted you on the point. Similarly:

About the weaker part. You did not even read what you cited….that’s lame….

You’re just making this up. You have no way to know what I did and did not read. Short of telepathy, you have no basis for this comment. All you’re doing is saying I didn’t read it because I disagree with you. And you follow this ridiculous pettiness with the time honored tactic of running away:

Anyway, since you prefer to argue instead of proposing new ideas, I’m not interested in giving you further explanations. Use those energies to find a good improvement instead of doing the same mistakes that you say I do.

Your behavior has been consistently petty, involving repeated rude remarks, constant misrepresentations and total fabrications. All the while, you’ve attacked people for nothing more than disagreeing with you. The best part is you repeatedly refused to provide any justification for a claim, but then you decided to right before leaving. Because apparently you were only willing to show your work when you knew it wouldn’t be challenged. Except, you knew someone might challenge it so you preemptively said it didn’t matter if you’ve been wrong:

Let’s say for 1 minute that I’m too optimistic and that a good team cannot put up this. In this case, your idea helps the spike finishing the kill….so, basically, we have 2 cases: I am right, or I am wrong and your idea changes nothing while ambush→crit would make the difference……

In other words, it’s okay if you completely hand-waved your way through the argument and were really just making things up all along. You’re still right!

Since you said I’m acting like a child, let me give a time-honored retort. “It takes one to know one!”

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Bosses and their tactics

Originally posted by Dreams_of_Fury:

you do realize that this was your first post in here that actually explained stuff, rather then just be an condescending person. It was a quick guide, written from the top of my head, so forgive me ooh mighty lord for making a mistake or 2, especially for stages that most people just auto.

I specifically said you combined the two stages of Shim to some extent, pointing out you listed skills from both classes. The exact same issue had been raised in the manner you suggest I should have raised it, a month earlier. You said you’d look into it, but didn’t.

Before you act like I’m being unreasonable, you made an obvious mistake, and you waited over a month to address it. Then, when you did address it, you made up a wild idea that bosses could use skills from more than one class in order to not admit you screwed up.

Mistakes happen, but that does nothing to justify petty behavior like yours.

You could have all saved us time as well by immediately stating "boss 1 does sunder and decay, where as boss 2 doesn’t "

fg109 did exactly that. It didn’t accomplish anything. There’s no reason to think me doing the same thing would have generated any different results. In fact, one could reasonably believe the only reason you admitted your mistake was because I’ve been critical of you. You sure didn’t admit it when people were kind with their responses.

That’d fit your behavior well given you just make things up whenever criticized. Before it was that bosses could use skills from multiple classes. Now its:

yet you come in here and just start shouting that everything in this guide is wrong based on an initial skim.

I never said everything was wrong with this guide. I said there was a specific problem that had gone unaddressed for over a month, and as such, the guide was suspect. That’s it. You’re massively exaggerating what I said in order to paint me as unreasonable. Given you’re doing this while downplaying your own mistake, it’s clear you’re just trying to refrain from admitting fault.

Or at least, I’d say it is when you start saying crazy things like:

Guide may not be perfect, may contain mistakes, but most people would at least be willing to enhance it (and have done) , instead of just outright blaspheming it. That will be the last I will go on about this, as this petty arguing doesn’t belong in a thread where not only me , but others as well are trying to help people.

Blaspheming, really? Blasphemy requires disrespect for a holy object or entity. Not only are you elevating your guide to the status of “sacred,” you’re painting me as some sort of heretic, all because I pointed out stupid mistakes that go unfixed make their source suspect.

By all means, take your holy symbol and go home so the evil heretic can’t hurt your feelings with his horrible blasphemy.

snorts

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Game Mechanic Change Suggestion

Originally posted by shin89:

First, I said that you were right about my sentence ‘we are all happy’, so I see no point in using it against me. It just shows that I admit when I do mistakes, so it actually helps me.

I used it to show a trend. The fact you acknowledged something that was part of a trend does not stop it from being part of a trend. The same is true for when you say:

Second: your idea and my idea are both easy to program (I program in C, C++ and Java, if you want more explanations just ask),

Previously, you responded to my idea by suggesting it would be more difficult to implement than yours. That claim was baseless. You now agree my idea would be as easy to implement as yours. This is the exact same behavior you demonstrated with the previous issue. It’s a disturbing and annoying trend. You basically just make things up. Sure, it’s good you’ve acknowledged being wrong, but that doesn’t solve the problem that you keep doing it. That problem is especially bad given you say things like:

but yours doesn’t solve the problem, since a buffed mif can still deal a crazy amount of damage critting.

Previously you’ve claimed, and refused to justify, saying a spike rush will automatically kill a player it attacks. I challenged that, and you ignored me. I challenge the notion that Mifzuna’s damage would be too high with my proposed change, and again, you’ve relied upon nothing but a bald assertion for it. I have no idea how you’d justify this claim, and for all I know, you’d back away from it like you have others (and seem to have about not needing crits in spike rushes).

Even worse, you say things like:

It makes it less overpowered, but it also affects the other creatures, changing the balancement a lot. So, before implementing it, you should consider a lot of factors, like the other affected abilities and block system. If you don’t change it also, making it addictive, crit and block won’t cancel each other.

Which are just wrong. Under my proposed change, crits and blocks will still cancel out. The only thing blocks won’t cancel out is the additional critical effect caused by things like Ambush, something it has never canceled out. For another example:

Also, you state that changing only ambush would make the system overly complicated for no reason, but you didn’t explained why. Since you are torturing me for explanations, don’t do the same….
I will explain why it is easy.
Different abilities are coded in different lanes, even if they can call the same functions. But developing an automatic crit chance on first attack is really easy, instead of calling the normal random function, you call another that gives you back 1, a low skilled programmer can do it in more or less 20 seconds.

This explanation is bogus. The way Ambush works now, it is a simple flag which, if set, causes the damage value to double. It does not touch any future steps, such as the one determining critical hits. There is no entryway for your proposed function. That means a fork would have to be inserted into the code to check to see if a new function should be called. That’s not something which would be done in 20 seconds.

You’re not suggesting a minor, comprehensive change to the system like I am. You’re suggesting a special case branch to the code pathway involving a new function. My change keeps the system as a single pathway with the only additional complexity being a single variable. Yours involves as much, plus an additional function which has to be maintained. That’s why it is more complicated than my idea.

When I said that the card is not weaker, if you have a higher stat, I’m in the right. With 0% crit chance, you deal X damage, with 30% crit chance you deal X damage, with 75% crit chance you are still dealing X damage. The card is not weaker at all, it’s equal. You said a right thing to state that my (different and right) statement was wrong. I choosed the words accurately.

This doesn’t address anything I’ve said at all. You’re simply ignoring my explanation, in which I even gave a specific, mathematical proof. As such, it’s cheeky to say:

Sometimes explanations are required, but usually people can catch the ideas. Long posts are boring.

Explanations aren’t required as often if you refrain from making things up. They also aren’t required as often if you address what people say in a direct manner. Just now you flat-out ignored an explanation of mine, said I’m wrong anyway, then said explanations aren’t usually required. Clearly, they are.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / maths are wrong...

Originally posted by Gambaro:

VIPs only get better packs in the shop and a higher crit/block rate. Apart from that, they are like free players with lots of gold. ^^

Maybe not in a single game. But after playing like 20 game you will see how much it matters…

No. So no. Crit and block rates are determined entirely by hero stats and reputation levels.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Rise of Mythos / Game Mechanic Change Suggestion

Originally posted by shin89:Well, using the addictive damage instead of the multiplicative one does not solve the problem.

Given this is the primary point of concern, I’d think you’d spend more time on it than a single sentence. For example, perhaps you’d explain how it does not solve the problem. This is akin to how I disagreed with you that a spike rush will automatically kill a player without a crit, and you said nothing further. It’s also related to how you said if a change got made, “[W]e are all happy” even though it’s a change some people would not be happy with.

Put simply, you’re stating conclusions without doing anything to support them. You do the same thing again when you say:

If we need a solution that doesn’t impact much normal decks and is easy to develope without changing many things, ambush→crit is the best solution.

Of course, if you want a perfectly balanced game you should just look for another one.

I understand your concern, but if we propose things that are hard to develope or that require many changements, it’s better to close this topic.

There is nothing about your idea that is inherently easier to code. An automatic critical hit system could easily involve as much effort to make as a change in how critical effects stack. It could easily involve more effort. You have no basis for this comment.

Things change a lot for spear/longbow damage, but I don’t find those ones overpowered. I’ve never seen someone using multiple encourages to double the damage on a cavalry/flying unit, so there’s no need to change their mechanics too.

Huh? You want to change Ambush to be an automatic crit, but you don’t want to change any other critical effects? That’d make the system overly complicated for no reason. Why would anyone want to create two different code paths just so one ability could work differently?

Anyway, when you say that a card should not get worse as your stats increase, I agree. And my suggestion does not make cards weaker if you have high stats, so I cannot see your point. Many other good games, like League of Legends (even if it’s a radical different game) have abilities to crit 100% on one attack, but people don’t complaint and still stack crit chance and like those abilities.

An automatic critical hit gets weaker, proportionally, as your reputation level (and Valour stat) increases. That’s basic math. As for League of Legends, when designing builds that involve the situation you’re referring to, people discuss how automatic crits make critical hit chance less important. I’ve participated in such discussions. While people may not “complaint,” they are aware of how it works.

It’s basic math. Suppose a unit gets two attacks. If it has a 50% crit rate, it’ll average one crit. Make one an automatic crit, and it’ll average 1.5. If that unit instead has a 0% crit rate, it’ll average zero crits. Make one attack an automatic crit, and it’ll average one crit. That means the difference in 0% and 50% crit rate goes from an average of one crit to an average of half a crit.