Thought Plynx's Beginner's Guide
I want to preface my beginner's guide with some thoughts on thought itself.
I feel like a lot of time and energy is wasted trying to do things with thought that are infeasible, or technically feasible, but by no means advisable. Let me give you some examples by way of analogy. If, for example, you saw someone trying to carry 9 items all at once, several things and in each hand and arm, balanced, and also clutching things to their chest, something under the chin, and another in the teeth, what would you think of this person if they saw a coin on the ground and tried to pick it up between their knees, only to stumble and fall over, sending all their items flying and falling over? I would think, "wow, that was very unwise." And yet, I see people attempting this same feat with their minds all the time.
Similarly, if I threw thousands of marbles on the floor, and asked someone to move them to another room, only to see them trying to scoop them up by the armful, grabbing scant few marbles, then heading to the other room dropping marbles all the time... I would be confused, to say the least, by this approach. I would be especially confused if, later, the exhausted person insulted their own inadequacies in arm length and thickness, wishing for fins instead like a seal, rather than simply using a bag. But a more common scenario might be: two people are both tasked with moving the marbles, one scoops with arms and the other uses a one-a-time approach, running back and forth to the other room as fast as possible, then afterwards debate the importance of fast legs, wide arms, sticky hands and the like, each coming to firm conclusions about the true nature of the task. Physically, it's ridiculous, but mentally, I see people doing it all the time.
In essence, the mind is like a body, capable of holding a certain limited number of things at once comfortably, some more, with effort, and a touch more, with still more exhausting effort, and in the end, unable to hold any more at onceâall the thoughts come crashing down. Like a body, the mind expends energy on holding those items in place before they are set down, and like a body, the mind can handle some shapes much easier than others. Some ways of using the mind have great throughput, and some, extremely finite. But, usually with our bodies, we are more aware of these limits. We don't try to design a car that requires 6 limbs to drive. We don't try to use a hammer that has a knife blade for a handle rather than a cushion grip. We don't use our pinkies to hold knives.
Throughout this guide, I will repeatedly insist on concepts that work with the contours of the mind, and how it naturally works, rather than working against it. I want to provide you a mental backpack, not a device that works by strapping great weight onto your mental pinky. So, since a beginner's guide to this game is in fact a guide to thinking about Spectromancer, it stands to reason to begin with the goal in mind, to explain what makes one way of thinking more convenient than another, and also why we often make errors in judgment for that very reason.
Visual bias Here is a Spectromancer board.
What immediately jumps out at you are the beautiful artwork, the individual cards and the board itself, the giant boxes of slots and the presence of creatures on the board. Your mind picks up on these details with comparatively little effort, because a great portion of it is devoted to making sense of the visual world. From this, there are things that are naturally much easier to think about than other things. The presence or absence of certain cards, the existence of favored combinations, the quantity of creatures on the board, whether blocked or unblocked, and so forth. Without us knowing it, those things that were the easiest to think about when we first saw the Spectromancer layout became the atoms of our thinkingâthe things easiest to think about, and therefore the most fundamental components of the game. All new concepts would be synthesized on the basis of these easily visualized components. Discussions would center on which cards are good, bad or overpowered; on which combinations are powerful, on rating the cards, on which creatures are good for a rush, on "board control", and so forth.
But that's a huge leap of an assumption. In fact, other than the visual simplicity in parsing the data, there is no real basis to assume that these are even close to the atomic units of gameplay. The striking differences between the art on the cards dominate the visual hierarchy, which our brain interprets and maps to fundamental importance. But this is such a strong bias, that just telling you that this card game is not, in fact, a game primarily about the cards at all, would likely just be taken as mumbo jumbo.
Alternative visualization
But what if the cards were presented a different way?
This shows the same information as my card layout from above. Feel free to take a moment to verify that this is so. Without pictures, and without using arabic numerals for mana costs, this visualization invites our brain to use a different way of mentally interpreting the cards, one that looks for patterns instead of cards as individually unique units.
Notice the huge gap in my fire cards, and the other large one in earth. Also notice that water and air mana are almost in lock step with each other. See the tantalizing stair step pattern at the end of my elemental houses. Notice that my only vertical gap is at 4 mana, an amount I cannot spend this game. I can now see things about the relationship between the cards and the houses much more easily than before.
Let's add another dimension to this visualization:
This time, we are showing spells as circles. Spells are conditional playsâI just can't play them whenever I want to. (The two rounded rectangles share some of this property, and the reasoning will be explained in detail in a later section). Now I can see that I have a string of spells in multiple houses both at the low end and in the mid-range. It is here that my reactive play will be strongest. The remaining squares are more flexible, but there are large gaps between many of my squares. Air has only one square. Water and fire have three each. This will also be covered in a later section, but for now, simply notice that you can see patterns easily now that you might not have been able to before.
There is a deeper relationship on my board between the houses that is made apparent here:
Here you can see the amazing flexibility of my water mana this game. All three squares are tied to a different color. Likewise, air and illusion recycle at the top.
But what about starting mana?
This is helpful in that it lets us not only see what is currently playable, but also how far away other things are. You can easily see that nothing new is going to be playable naturally next turn. All the mana bars terminate into blank space or onto a circle. Without knowing the cards except for water 3 and water 5, can you put together a string of moves that will efficiently get the best (rightmost) and most squares out, and avoid the problem of bars being stranded in gaps? There are in fact a few options, and these will become your strategic candidates. Note that we are deciding strategic candidates before thinking about what our cards actually are. It's not that important.
This last visualization is helpful for seeing patterns for the immediate future, but what's really interesting is where our mana bar is going, not where it is now. For that, let's normalize our visualization around a new center point of the house mana:
In this visualization, the future is brought into plain view. Everything to the right of the line is not playable now, but will be playable that many turns into the future. Notice the stair stepping pattern that indicates a series of strong plays. This is highly desirable, so when we make our moves, we don't want to mess that up (I will refer to this as alignment in the future). In this visualization, we push the mana bar over to the right to pay for a move. For example, if I open with fire 1, I slide the fire bar over to the right 1 to pay for it, and next turn all of the bars slide left 1. This changes the alignment of fire with respect to the other houses.
But what happens if we play Water 5? Since we want to keep our ability to visualize deep into the future easily, we don't want to get into messy situations where the bars move at different rates. Instead, we can just imagine Water 5 compressing the time represented:
Here my water bar has been pushed to the right all the way, and the air bar has been compressed. We can see from this visualization a gap right after our play line, suggesting a strong commitment to fire 1 and then earth 7, before options become agile againâa fact that might escape many a new player. This is an important aspect of strategic validation that I will cover later.
For now, I want to return to the original topic of this section, which is thought itself. Thought can get "stuck" in many ways, but one of the most difficult ways happens right at the start, with the assumptions we make about which analytical tools to apply to a given situation. Spectromancer certainly presents itself as a card game, calling to mind games such as Magic: The Gathering. One of the common questions on the forums here from new players is how to build a deck. But, despite being billed as a fantasy card game, the cards act terribly strange for fantasy cards. I don't draw them. I have no graveyard or library. I have no hand size nor hand. When I play a card, it doesn't go out of my hand, rather a duplicate comes out of nowhere. In fact, these buttons that represent my moves don't behave in any way like cards at all. Like old-fashioned games of Bridge or Poker, but unlike CCGs, you and your opponent cannot have the same card, because they are being dealt from a single shared deckâthe card analogy only applies to the information game. In fact in this game, though the artwork is lavished on large, appealing cards much like a CCG, the fundamental mechanic most comparable to drawing in CCGsâthe lockstep tick-tock clicking of 5 houses forward in timeâis not visualized at all.
That can leave us working with our brains in a manner similar to picking up marbles one by one and running from room to room, or trying to hold awkward idea upon awkward idea in our mind all at once until all our thoughts fall down on the ground around us. Because thinking of Spectromancer as "just" a card game has already got us off on trying to do heavy mental lifting with our mental pinky. Modified by Plynx on 2015-02-04 18:01:48 | bluedawn | 2015-02-04 17:24:27 |
I can not read english very well. But a great article. Thank you.
| FORESTRY | 2015-02-04 17:39:57 |
You all thought i was mad for using codes and colors in my custom visualisations!!!! MWHAHAHAhahhahahshgssd
| Cooler | 2015-02-04 18:12:51 |
Wow! Big respect for this png->jpg trick!  | MikeBnDe | 2015-02-04 18:56:05 |
What a great article to start your guide. Brilliant.
| HeadphonesGirl | 2015-02-04 19:13:42 |
Wow! Big respect for this png->jpg trick! I'm impressed by that as well. No idea how you accomplished it.  Very interesting way of conceptualizing the game. This is particularly fascinating to me actually based on my own observations about the way different people think and especially how it relates to how I think.
When you got to this part, in particular, is what really got me interested, because I got stuck on it. I had to look at the picture and re-read the paragraph below it several times before I actually grasped what you were doing with this image. I don't think this is because it's confusing, it's because I have an unusual difficulty processing visual information and transferring it into remembered knowledge. When I was 17 I was actually given a psychological learning evaluation that said my deficiency in that area was such a sharp contrast to my verbal/language retention skills that exists in less than 1% of the population (but I did not have ADHD, so that was good!) I mention this because reading this guide really throws into contrast how someone who thinks like me sees the game and how you do. I have always thought it a little funny that someone like me enjoys a game like spectromancer as much as I do, and theorized that it probably prevents me from being as good at the game as I could be if I was better at thinking in numbers, but now I'm wondering how much of it is actually more of a spacial-thinking limitation than a numerical-thinking one (although, another interesting thing is that I have always felt like the two were related and the test I took seemed to agree that it's the same difficulty processing information which gives me trouble with both). So, in that light, I'm really curious about some things which may be getting ahead a little. So if the answer to any of this is "hang on, it will be explained in a later chapter" that's totally cool. How much do you utilize these images when actually playing? Do you have this kind of abstract visualization of the playing board in your head at all times, is it something you put down in a document and reference as the game goes on? Or is this actually not a visualization that you normally use while playing but simply a tool for explaining fundamentals of the game within the guide? I'm particularly interested in this because if you are arguing that part of the key to playing the game well is visualization of this sort, I am at quite a disadvantage (which is fine, since I already felt that I was), and if your technique involves actually visualizing the game this way while playing, that is something that would be virtually impossible for me to do. I could probably eventually teach myself to map it out in a chart, but I don't think I would like to play that way either, because it is so contrary to how I actually perceive things. None of this is in any way suggesting there's a deficiency in your guide, it is very well presented and I'm really looking forward to reading the rest of it. | tosher | 2015-02-04 19:22:21 |
Ñк-макаÑÑк...( нам нÑжен пеÑеводÑик  | YourLuckyGame | 2015-02-04 20:15:11 |
Ñк-макаÑÑк...(
нам нÑжен пеÑеводÑик Я пеÑеведÑ. ÐÑли еÑе никÑо не наÑал пеÑеводиÑÑ. | MikeBnDe | 2015-02-04 21:09:22 |
How much do you utilize these images when actually playing? Do you have this kind of abstract visualization of the playing board in your head at all times, is it something you put down in a document and reference as the game goes on? Or is this actually not a visualization that you normally use while playing but simply a tool for explaining fundamentals of the game within the guide?
This is exactly what i was asking myself when i read it.
But what happens if we play Water 5? Since we want to keep our ability to visualize deep into the future easily, we don't want to get into messy situations where the bars move at different rates. Instead, we can just imagine Water 5 compressing the time represented:
Here my water bar has been pushed to the right all the way, and the air bar has been compressed. We can see from this visualization a gap right after our play line, suggesting a strong commitment to fire 1 and then earth 7, before options become agile againâa fact that might escape many a new player. This is an important aspect of strategic validation that I will cover later.
I cant edit above. I want say maybe there is a error.If u played water 5 first,the Fire Cards shouldnt push right.
Modified by SoAid on 2015-02-05 02:34:49 | Wavelength | 2015-02-05 03:03:02 |
Very interesting.
In some ways you can look at the crossing of cards over the "mana playable" line almost like drawing cards; this has a lot of implications on how you want to play the game. It also shines a completely different light on classes like Holy, Goblin, Control and Demon.
What does a general "good cycle" visualization look like, once you've reached the midgame and have some opportunity to manage your future mana flow? Or is this question one that a player should not be asking?
I want say maybe there is a error.If u played water 5 first,the Fire Cards shouldnt push right.
the fire cards were pushed one step to the right before playing water 5. that was an alternative visualisation to represent starting mana positions. no error there 
Modified by filip on 2015-02-05 09:55:45 wow! cool job plynx  seems very interesting! thanks for putting the effort in man
Modified by filip on 2015-02-05 09:58:02 | YourLuckyGame | 2015-02-05 13:11:57 |
| minhtuan | 2015-02-05 14:04:05 |
Wow, simply wow! Like YLG above, I'm eager to read your next part of your philosophy and insight.
| CyberneticPony | 2015-02-06 03:34:00 |
Honestly, think this is actually a pretty bad guide; it doesn't help to visualise cards based solely on their mana costs because that misses out a huge amount of information and the "gaps" model does not account for whether or not it is worth waiting or not for later cards; higher cost cards aren't necessarily strictly better in this game. I just think that trying to teach people how to think actually runs into the language philosophy problems; this system could work for Plynx but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a good way to do things. A methodology of thought may converge in this case to a better result faster but that's not the important part in understanding how to solve the game! My contention is the statement: "Note that we are deciding strategic candidates before thinking about what our cards actually are. It's not that important." I think it's a complete fabrication to say it's not important. While it may seem like you're getting the higher mana cost card out with this model; this means squat when your opponent can often win with less cards on the board simply due to cards that have higher max efficiencies. Just imagine Stone Rain as a good example of a card with this impact.
The point about this not being a card game is perfectly fine; it can be seen as a tokens game, but none of this actually gives any strategic benefit to playing better; this guide simply realigns concepts in a different form. Maybe it'll help people, but frankly this is just a bit arrogant in my view.
| minhtuan | 2015-02-06 05:39:17 |
Don't criticize before you see the full guide, CyberPony. You might assume what he doesn't mean and say.
Plynx see the game differently and wins more often. Modified by minhtuan on 2015-02-06 05:45:32 | CyberneticPony | 2015-02-06 06:21:29 |
Don't criticize before you see the full guide, CyberPony. You might assume what he doesn't mean and say.
Plynx see the game differently and wins more often. So it's ok to praise the guide before you read the whole guide, but not ok to criticise? I guess I could clarify to say that I am not fond of this particular section, that's all, the rest of the guide might be a lot better. Also, it's irrelevant he "wins more often" when advocating a methodology; because someone else adopting it won't necessarily just instantaneously make them top 10 material.
Modified by CyberneticPony on 2015-02-06 06:23:32 | MikeBnDe | 2015-02-06 08:17:36 |
Too bad that english is not my native language and i so i cannot respond to pony's post in a way i would like to. So
let me just say, that I still think its a great article, raises a few
excellent points, introduces a different concept, is written really
well and entertaining. And honestly Pony, what did you expect, reading
the first article of a probably long guide and you instantly have the
instruction/ the strategic guide to become a level 50 player? And
where does he say that the goal is 'getting the higher mana cost out'? Am i missing something? I cannot find this statement, but i don't have time right now to re-read the whole article. For me it what was more about the mana flow (identifiying gaps, finding series/patterns of strong plays, finding the right analytic tools/approach to analyze the game and not get distracted by visuals etc.) And he wrote 'strategic candidates before thinking...' So i think after identifying the strategic candidates of course there comes a point where
you think which candidate among them is the best choice in the current
situation and you look what the card actually does.
Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-02-06 08:18:29 | Tendou | 2015-02-06 08:40:07 |
I would argue that at first glance the alignment theory may come handy in achieving in actual duels, but that also restrict the order in which we are trying to play the cards. I am saying that we may be better off with a conclusion that you would like to get as many options as possible as soon as you can, and not try to pull out a high mana creature every turn.
guys please chill out. plynx has probably got 1000 things in his mind, trying to organize and communicate them to us in a sensible way. this is just the prologue, not the master methodology with which to beat everybody at this game. he tries to provide fresh insight and a new (not the only) way to look at game mechanics. it is a useful way and it matches some of my own thoughts about the game, ones that had not crossed my mind when i started playing. i am pretty sure that other approaches will follow, probably more conventional than this one. CyberneticPony, it is my impression that you are the one behaving arrogantly at this point. please show some respect to a phenomenal player that is actually putting in the effort to offer advice to people like you. you could try to keep some useful tips from this article (as well as the next ones) but of course there is no need to follow another player's train of thought blindly. your points are valid and you should continue to keep them in mind. but if you want to improve at this game (you seem to be stuck - according to your own words in another thread) you could try not insisting so much in your own viewpoint and keeping an open mind to others, so that you can take away some bits of useful advice from each of them. just my 2 cents
Modified by filip on 2015-02-06 13:32:10 Wow! Big respect for this png->jpg trick! I really love the look of the forums, so I really wanted to use PNG. Thanks for the PNG update!
How much do you utilize these images when actually playing? Do you have this kind of abstract visualization of the playing board in your head at all times, is it something you put down in a document and reference as the game goes on? Or is this actually not a visualization that you normally use while playing but simply a tool for explaining fundamentals of the game within the guide?
None of the above, really. The point is to demonstrate a way to ascertain different fundamentals about the game, and to explain why people so often pick only subset of the game as their reasoning tools.
There are many more fundamentals to explore that are apparent in none of the visualizations above. I'll cover more of them, and a general purpose technique for examining any game for key and overlooked concepts, in another section.
I want say maybe there is a error.If u played water 5 first,the Fire Cards shouldnt push right.
the fire cards were pushed one step to the right before playing water 5. that was an alternative visualisation to represent starting mana positions. no error there
Filip is correct.
What does a general "good cycle" visualization look like, once you've reached the midgame and have some opportunity to manage your future mana flow? Or is this question one that a player should not be asking? I suppose that depends on what definition of "midgame" you prefer, but there are many potential ways to plan out your house alignment. A really bad way would be to have them all lined up vertically, for example, with large vertical gaps. | GrimJ0ker | 2015-02-06 12:41:34 |
It's important that no one expects to become level 50 thanks to a guide. A guide can give you the ingredients for a formula, but it doesn't make you in any way the best chefs in the world. | Ruby456 | 2015-02-06 19:06:31 |
If U can Explain all colors what they Are , My Air Powers , my Fire and water Red maybe it's fire Blue Water and what is the Mana Power color?   LeveL 50 ? Some People is real Happy width LeveL's 10 and 15 Because it's a Hard work !, Now all low Player plays Better than before . Not so Easy to take Level 10 or 11 Maybe for U GrimJ0ker it is More easy because u have more time to duels .. Soon u will be a 50 LeveL Player !! Maybe more. I clean rooms i do cooking and alse things no time to play just some simple Trainings vs Master Mage . No Girl Friend now ...
all's gone ...I play with Friends here is 2 Trainings Games vs BadSleep a good Friend of mine !@! He is Level 18 today ...me only 10 .
| HeadphonesGirl | 2015-02-06 22:07:47 |
... None of the above, really. The point is to demonstrate a way to ascertain different fundamentals about the game, and to explain why people so often pick only subset of the game as their reasoning tools.
Cool. Looking forward to it.
| Jeronimo | 2015-02-07 06:19:50 |
Nice article and presentation Plynx.
People that don't find the article fulfilling, must be because of its headline-> Thought I believe this headline could be more intuitive for article's content-> Turn 0
Features related to Turn 0: *Initial visualization of cards and mana distribution *Finding relationships (possible combos candidates) *Anticipating threats (possible opponent's plans)
Turn 0 refers to the first 30 seconds in a match (like a "mental turn" before actually playing Turn 1). Thought would still remain explained in the introduction, preparing the reader for what is coming. Modified by Jeronimo on 2015-02-07 10:56:47 | srbhkshk | 2015-02-07 07:27:48 |
Its an interesting start, I guess every decent player subconsciously uses the same concept but very few will be able to elucidate it the same way if you were to ask.
it doesn't help to visualise cards based solely on their mana costs because that misses out a huge amount of information and the "gaps" model does not account for whether or not it is worth waiting or not for later cards; higher cost cards aren't necessarily strictly better in this game. I just think that trying to teach people how to think actually runs into the language philosophy problems; this system could work for Plynx but that doesn't necessarily mean it's a good way to do things. A methodology of thought may converge in this case to a better result faster but that's not the important part in understanding how to solve the game!
My contention is the statement: "Note that we are deciding strategic candidates before thinking about what our cards actually are. It's not that important." I think it's a complete fabrication to say it's not important. In your case, CyberneticPony, you don't need a guide about thought or its limitations. You only need to use your existing methodology and look ahead 1000 moves. Everything is potentially important, and therefore the whole game is simply a tactical problem to be solved. Good luck.
And where does he say that the goal is 'getting the higher mana cost out'? In the passage I invite the reader to try to find a way to get to the rightmost squares without falling into gaps. This can be interpreted as "getting the higher mana cost out"; I am indeed stressing the importance of considering ways to do, not simply making moves now that cripple that ability 6,7,8 turns from now.
What CyberneticPony doesn't realize (and she has lots of good company) is the significance of the facts that in Spectromancer, you can only spend mana from one house in one turn and only in the designated amounts, and that mana replenishes naturally by only one in each house each turn.
Those are hugely important details about this game, but often overlooked or simply given a nod on the way to trying to get out "good" cards or "good" combos while completely wrecking all their future move potential. It took me a while to realize that players were trying to think about the game card by card, then berating their lack of brainpower.
For me it what was more about the mana flow (identifiying gaps, finding series/patterns of strong plays, finding the right analytic tools/approach to analyze the game and not get distracted by visuals etc.) Exactly. Thinking in series/patterns is much better and easier than thinking card by card.
I would argue that at first glance the alignment theory may come handy in achieving in actual duels, but that also restrict the order in which we are trying to play the cards. Sorry, but I don't understand that sentence.
I am saying that we may be better off with a conclusion that you would like to get as many options as possible as soon as you can, and not try to pull out a high mana creature every turn. It's difficult not to have more options when your houses are aligned properly, in addition to being able to make a high throughput proactive move. But in any event, that is not what I am suggesting. There is certainly more to the game than playing solitaire with your own cards. What I find amazing, though, is that so many players actually lose solitaire to their own hand in this game, simply for not seeing that it's there.
It's important that no one expects to become level 50 thanks to a guide. A guide can give you the ingredients for a formula, but it doesn't make you in any way the best chefs in the world.
So true.
Nice article and presentation Plynx.
People that doesn't find the article full-filling, must be because of its headline-> Thought I believe this one could be more accurate for article's content-> Turn 0
Thanks, but this definitely not the case. I have another section planned for analyzing an opening hand. As I mentioned before I ever wrote a single section, the hardest thing about it was going to be that people would try to squash my words into their own framework for understanding the game, essentially hoping that I am going to speak a language they already speak instead of having to go to the trouble to learn a new one. They wanted me to write a post or two talking about cool tricks with card A and B they never thought of, and tell people things like "use card X more, especially vs. class B", and dubious factoids "pretend your life is already 20-40 life lower than it is vs forest, golem, and illusion".
Thought is important for a first article because we have to understand that whatever mechanism you use to think about the game must respect the brain's limits. Most people picked up on cards right away, and the first thing I ask them to do is discard that because we are going to use much larger chunks.
Of course I expected resistance. No one likes the suggestion that hard won skills are potentially irrelevant to what I am presenting.
Its an interesting start, I guess every decent player subconsciously uses the same concept but very few will be able to elucidate it the same way if you were to ask. I can't say for sure, but I get the feeling that most players don't. From watching a few videos and observing, I get the impression that instead people are thinking about individual cards, while having a long term goal of a favored card combo or specific synergy they hope to attain. Then they just try to think exhaustively about each individual cards the opponent might use. | FORESTRY | 2015-02-07 08:19:12 |
The forum is plagued by threads ive made of mixed quantitative and qualitative analysis, ive done about 15 extensive ones, and im very interested in your perspective.
edit: not asking you to read them, just cheering you on Modified by FORESTRY on 2015-02-07 10:04:46 | Tendou | 2015-02-07 11:43:05 |
For the sentence that you didnt understand Plynx: If you can throw out high mana creatures one by one into the board preassumes that you want to place them into the board as soon as possible regardless of the order. E.g the one argument about the alignment in your post is that it is ok to put the creatures down in this order: bargul then water elemental then air elemental then hydra. Many times this order is not plausible by the fact that your opponent may have mass destruction cards or tornado. That is it.
The forum is plagued by threads ive made of mixed quantitative and qualitative analysis, ive done about 15 extensive ones, and im very interested in your perspective.
edit: not asking you to read them, just cheering you on Actually I would really love to read them. I'm not sure how to find them though.
For the sentence that you didnt understand Plynx: If you can throw out high mana creatures one by one into the board preassumes that you want to place them into the board as soon as possible regardless of the order. E.g the one argument about the alignment in your post is that it is ok to put the creatures down in this order: bargul then water elemental then air elemental then hydra. Many times this order is not plausible by the fact that your opponent may have mass destruction cards or tornado. That is it. Thanks for explaining!
That's definitely not what I'm saying. First, I'm not advising passing 4 turns. The goal is for each individual play to have the potential to be strong. The sequence you mention is four turns in the future and is totally out of reach. Attempting it would lose the game.
What I am showing in the last visualization is a way you can project your future mana alignment and see if a sequence of strong plays will come up or you will get gaps instead. These are high throughput vs. low throughput plays.
For example, Water 5->Fire 1->Earth 7->Air 11->Illusion 6->Water 5 is available, and happens to be a very strong line with many reactive possibilities. Imagine drawing a line from one to the other on the graph, and notice how it traces through time column by column (after the gap bridged by Fire 1) without having to slide the bars.
Taking your opponent's moves and cards into consideration is an important skill, one that I will cover in other sections, most notably The Information Game, but you want to make your opponent beat you, not trip over your own feet. Cards like Stone Rain or Armageddon are going to be covered under Pinning. But other than Drain Souls, strong high throughput lines typically are also resilient to pinning (will be covered under Board resilience and temporal hedging). By chance, this hand has all the elemental mass destruction already, so certainly consider Spirit 4 and Spirit 6, by noting those plays are not going to devastate your line so much as clear space for you to continue it, and that your Air 11 will likely eat a tornado. Change your line if your opponent reveals an opening, and be glad you positioned yourself well to take it. Reconsider your plan with new information after each move (covered in How to create a multi-layered strategy). Hopefully having written this no one will continue to think I am advocating playing with a blindfold on. | Tendou | 2015-02-07 14:18:51 |
Yeah, i thought about future alignment too, i never considered to go use those 4 cards in that same order i mentioned, instead my point is that the gap strategy you mentioned is useful in short term, but planning on using high level cards without in a stair stepping pattern is highly unlikely as you will have to use lower mana cards to keep up with board control etc. The key point is still up to be regarded which is that alignment is good in theory but not an important factor to consider at all because besides that there are many ways in which such plans can be ruined easily what is more important i think is to have access to mana and cards at the times when they are really much needed. I would go even further to say that many times it is worse to have only 1 mana left to get a card, because such effort may be also ruined by cards like control 1,2 etc. So just for the sake of example, let's say you start with 1 less fire mana, and 1 more earth mana. This way you will get access to air elemental and hydra in the same turn. This way the stair stepping pattern is ruined but what i am arguing here is that this way you are facing a better position because now you can choose between hydra and air elemental as well and decide in which order do you want to play them instead of the air elemental and then hydra play which is compulsory if you want to stick to the pattern under any circumstances(which of you dont). So as noticing price gaps inside the mana houses is such an important factor to consider, the stair stepping pattern is not in any way desirable on its own(maybe under strict circumstances it is, but mostly not).
| Tendou | 2015-02-07 14:27:10 |
So nobody should feel bad because he/she gets access to useful cards at the same time, it is rather better because he can choose which one to play out first.
This way the stair stepping pattern is ruined but what i am arguing here is that this way you are facing a better position ... So as noticing price gaps inside the mana houses is such an important factor to consider, the stair stepping pattern is not in any way desirable on its own(maybe under strict circumstances it is, but mostly not).
I understand what you mean now. No, moving those two things next to each other does not ruin your game, but I can see how my wording makes it seem that way. A better word choice by me would have been "stepping stone" pattern. At every step in time you would like at least one stone. More is not bad, of course. But, be careful. With only 4 cards per house, lining up a lot of these at the same spot in time usually means trouble at some other point in time.
Just by lining up hydra and air elemental as in your example, we've now got gaps on turns 3, 4, 8, and 9, whereas before we only had a gap on turn 2. That's what I mean by taking care with not messing up stair stepping patternsâit's ridiculously easy to inadvertently stack them creating large gaps with very small, seemingly insignificant plays. If left unresolved, this cascades into weak plays later, often begetting further weak plays, like an engine sputtering and dying. (Of course it's unlikely that we will see hydra and air elemental pop into playability at the same time in scenario. We need to fix the immediate large gap and that will probably involve both air and earth before we get there.)
Thanks for explaining your point. I really appreciate it. Modified by Plynx on 2015-02-08 12:08:24 | To Cybernetic Pony | 2015-02-07 21:10:48 |
Before some Months i wass Like , to give some Very - Interesting Magic width PLAYING CARDS MATHETATICALY -THIS IS REALity! NOTT JOCK - To Cybernetic Pony ! she or he TELL me no Ruby !@! Doesen't Want to watch in Youtube ... So how u wanna Know ? this wass a Very cooL magic Like Protect a Card a Generator one ... the trick name wass the Magnificiant 5 ... I INVENTED THIS !@! butt some ALSE Magicians OLDS GRAND MASTERS BUILD SAME Magic Trick , with PLaying Cards Like me after - some weeks ! and this is Interesting ...Who doesen't Look and Watch Doesen't KNOW !! so I think to --- --- Plynx is a Excelent Visionary Player !! sometimes we don't see Many things , Just rounding Near of UR Noise and don't See that . Before U must see and try to Combine some Graphics If u hadd just 2 variating things of this - U reaL go FORWARD ... thx Ruby456 is Here ... And U Cybernatic Pony don't think u KNOW EVERYTHING ! Look before u say something about alse Masters ...
| Ruby456 | 2015-02-07 21:13:48 |
It's LIKE BEFORE I NOTT REGIST! AND IF i- nott say who i'm , U CAN'T KNOW THIS IS ME Ruby456 ...
| FORESTRY | 2015-02-08 00:29:18 |
It's LIKE BEFORE I NOTT REGIST! AND IF i- nott say who i'm , U CAN'T KNOW THIS IS ME Ruby456 ...
Oh dont worry, your style of writing is unique and cant be mistaken for someone elses | FORESTRY | 2015-02-08 00:58:37 |
... Actually I would really love to read them. I'm not sure how to find them though.
Unfortunately, this forum's search function is kind of shitty, so I can't find the great majority of the things i've written, but these are some of the important ones: The "Speed" series (which is a classification of creatures of the basic houses divided by if they make the duel go longer or shorter, which is a basic synergy dialectic... is it to our advantage to try to finish the game, or do we have an advantage in the long term?):
Basic Class Overviews (this is about possible synergies between creatures in the context of their presence efficiency value related to their mana cost and from that a derivation of their qualitative roles): http://spectromancer.com/forum.cgi#pageid=3972
Special Class Overviews (this is about the strategical options we have with special classes given the pairings of slots in special classes 1v2, 3v4, 5v6, 7v8, the intraclass synergies and the general class strenghts and weaknesses): http://spectromancer.com/forum.cgi#pageid=3327
Board Presence Theory (general musings on relations between creatures and creature control and destruct play... the concept of flanking with trash creatures vs. the strenght and resilience of expensive slots that weather the storms): http://spectromancer.com/forum.cgi#pageid=3258
Modified by FORESTRY on 2015-02-08 01:02:04 ... in Spectromancer, you can only spend mana from one house in one turn and only in the designated amounts, and that mana replenishes naturally by only one in each house each turn.
it pays off to think about how we may want to spend each house's mana in the game. we should make a rough plan but keep in mind that we're not necessarily sticking to it. this is where the opponent comes in that's why we need many and good options...
... I'm not advising passing 4 turns. The goal is for each individual play to have the potential to be strong.
... you will have to use lower mana cards to keep up with board control etc.
know that when you play something each turn, it takes away some of your other (more expensive) options in that house, at least for some more turns in the future. when playing an expensive card (if the game is in such state that we can make good use out of it) something very cool happens: we have channelled lots of house mana in a spell or a creature that's going to have an impact on the game (proportional to its cost hopefully:P) but we have only used one turn to do so compare this with playing multiple Forest Sprite s for example (which i admit am very fond of playing i should confess )
sorry if my musings are stealing your thunder a bit here plynx  but i'm sure you're going to take your own ways anyways!!  (that's me dropping dead on the right)Modified by filip on 2015-02-08 01:46:40 ...
gathering all the links would be great! hey forestry try using google to search the forum by adding " site:spectromancer.com" at the end of your query!
Modified by filip on 2015-02-08 01:10:16 | FORESTRY | 2015-02-08 03:22:43 |
...
gathering all the links would be great! hey forestry try using google to search the forum by adding " site:spectromancer.com" at the end of your query!
The problem is on one hand that i dont remember the keywords... before you wrote this i did keywords and google search which helped me out a lot, without the "site:" specification, i THINK i got the important ones, i intentionally forgoed the linear regression one because i dont believe in it anymore. | CyberneticPony | 2015-02-09 15:34:43 |
You do not need to look ahead 1000 moves; you just need a relatively good heuristic for pruning, which often just means having a good idea of what to do in the case of the presence of a card in a card pool. That isn't even a difficult problem on its own; the issue with the game is the huge swing in mechanics and the somewhat offhand way the game is balanced; it's not clear where lines are.
Also, it's rude to speak for someone else. I perfectly understand your mana is not the only cap in plays, but the speed of one card per turn is particularly relevant for timings. The problem I have with gaps model is that it doesn't address the fact that cards are not modelled in such a way that you can write the function of a card's value (when I say "value" here I am referring to how good it is to play in this particular board configuration) in terms of its strict mana cost; it's not going to actually be helpful in a real game because someone using this may easily just lose to someone sacrificing their mana/turn efficiency for a boom combo.
... In your case, CyberneticPony, you don't need a guide about thought or its limitations. You only need to use your existing methodology and look ahead 1000 moves. Everything is potentially important, and therefore the whole game is simply a tactical problem to be solved. Good luck.
...
In the passage I invite the reader to try to find a way to get to the rightmost squares without falling into gaps. This can be interpreted as "getting the higher mana cost out"; I am indeed stressing the importance of considering ways to do, not simply making moves now that cripple that ability 6,7,8 turns from now.
What CyberneticPony doesn't realize (and she has lots of good company) is the significance of the facts that in Spectromancer, you can only spend mana from one house in one turn and only in the designated amounts, and that mana replenishes naturally by only one in each house each turn.
Modified by CyberneticPony on 2015-02-09 15:35:40 | TheWillofSauron | 2015-02-09 16:11:14 |
Again, nice reading ... In THEORY, defining what u can play, but ALSO what your opponent can play, should lead you to understand if you have or will have a winning condition soon. I'm a casual player who will play focused and concentrated just vs Grim (LOL), but really usually I'm so lazy and don't go that deeper. Anyway, what it happens to my mind in some games, just after my draw and looking at the opponent's house ... is this: "how can I win or react to that"? And I found no answer, but maybe losing in some original way (Grim knows about that as well ROFL) which I seem to like :) Example: I have air 8 only as a spell, playing any class with no big spells, no tornado ... I see my oppo is going for Chaos 8 ... how to counter or play vs that? It's just an example, but it's what a low-end player as myself really realizes in quite some nï¿¿ of games ...
PS: sorry for my ugly english, not a native eng speaker here as well :) Modified by TheWillofSauron on 2015-02-09 16:12:28 | GarryHe | 2015-02-13 04:39:39 |
I'm more confused after reading it  | AngryArab | 2015-05-25 05:23:27 |
Nnnmeeprgh. Nnnnmooooooo. Nnnnwugwugwug. Me Neanderthal. Me Early Man. You have Bargul. Me want Bargul. Nnnnwukwuk. Hoohoohoohoohoo. *jumps into tree* Modified by Wavelength on 2015-05-26 06:09:42 | CyberneticPony | 2015-05-25 06:49:23 |
I would prefer if this game didn't have pretty pictures.
Let me explain, but before I do I feel I need to preface what I am about to say; as to not offend. Women are great at a lot of things. Such as having babies and changing diapers.... But math and logic... Not so much.
Even though we know all this to be true, oddly enough I have lost some games to women. How could this be? Here's how: they don't understand what the cards actually do, but they just pick the pictures in a way that make the prettiest collage. Add a little Lady Luck with this unconventional method and they can actually win a few games.
This can be a dangerous trend. If women start wasting time doing things that they think they are good at, but really aren't... Then who is going to squeeze out the pups? This gave me a right laugh, not only because it was an obvious troll, but that the "man" doesn't have the balls to put a face to the name. | Tendou | 2015-05-25 08:40:11 |
I would prefer if this game didn't have pretty pictures.
Let me explain, but before I do I feel I need to preface what I am about to say; as to not offend. Women are great at a lot of things. Such as having babies and changing diapers.... But math and logic... Not so much.
Even though we know all this to be true, oddly enough I have lost some games to women. How could this be? Here's how: they don't understand what the cards actually do, but they just pick the pictures in a way that make the prettiest collage. Add a little Lady Luck with this unconventional method and they can actually win a few games.
This can be a dangerous trend. If women start wasting time doing things that they think they are good at, but really aren't... Then who is going to squeeze out the pups? Even if we accept your claim, i don't think all women has purely characteristics of their own gender and there are many whom think the way men do and vice versa. I would never tell anyone what they should be busy with just because of inherent biological features they happened to born with I would rather get to know them better personally and have suggestions for what they may fail at or what they would be good at instead.
| Sylvia | 2015-05-25 13:54:58 |
(laugh with all my Alts)
Dude, you are awesome, whoever you are!
Have you slept the last 100 years like Snowwhite or what?
In any case the new reality must have caused a tremendous shock, as we all can see...
| CyberneticPony | 2015-05-28 00:37:40 |
That was a hilarious edit Wavelength!
| 
