Rarity: Uncommon
Buy: $6
Sell: $3
Effect: Earn $1 for every Stone Card in your full deck at end of round
#Stone Hedge (re-upload)
austere plume
tender bloom
Tbh if cloud 9 didn’t exist I wouldn’t mind this, but I think this is a little less interesting than it
zenith lion
I like the idea, but this feels like it's just better than Cloud 9
tender bloom
Cloud 9 is cool cause strength is a little limited and it also enables 4oak and 5oak builds, stone hedge is just marble joker and tower which is a lil boring
gusty plover
I definitely misread the title 😭
tender bloom
cosmic geode
coral pine
I definitely misread the title 😭
same
jade isle
I got an idea for this: Lowers Blind Score by 1% per Stone Card in Deck (maximum [there should probably be a maximum, idk, maybe 30% ?])
The idea is that it makes it easier to defeat a Blind, because that target score is reduced.
idk how to put it into words tho
real magnet
I think people forget to translate blind score reductions when suggesting changes. 30 stone cards is equivalent to less than 1.5× mult.
jade isle
I think people forget to translate blind score reductions when suggesting change...
what do you mean exactly? I don't follow
real magnet
what do you mean exactly? I don't follow
Lowering the blind requirement by 30% is the same as just multiplying the score by roughly 1.428. that means that with your suggestion, even with a deck containing 30 stone cards, the gain would still be equivalent to less ×mult than a single polychrome.
In other words, lowering the blind amount by 50% is basically just multiplying your score by 2. Since mult is multiplied by chips to get your final score, ×mult = ×score. Getting ×2 mult is thus equal to lowering the blind requirement by 50%.
To translate your suggestion to ×mult, you are getting on average less than 0.015 ×mult per a stone card. That is 17.5 times slower than hologram's scaling.
jade isle
correction (that might be what threw me off): getting x2 mult is not equal to lowering the blind requirement by 50%, but it is a similar effect if your score barely beats the blind.
real magnet
Assuming your joker placement puts the ×2mult after all +mult, it is identical. Say you score 150 in a hand and the blind requirement is 300. With ×2 mult, you now score 300. With 50% reduction, the score to make is now 150, no difference.
jade isle
its a whole different mechanic and can't be seen as a x1.5 mult if you consider multiple hands to be played
real magnet
Not really, I play hand 1, it scores 100, I play hand 2 it score 50, they now score 200 and 100 respectively which adds to 300
I could also add them up to 150 and then do the same ×2
jade isle
you keep saying a very specific score, it changes the goal post, not what you score. it's a different mechanic.
that's just not how math works
real magnet
The amount of scoring you need to do doesn't change is the point.
real magnet
If my joker setup score 450 and I need 900, multiplying by ×2 mult or reducing the score needed to 450 are identical in how much they enable winning.
jade isle
it doesn't matter how much +mult, chips or xmult you have when the joker changes the score you have to hit
real magnet
Think about it like this, reducing the score requirement by 50% makes your score twice as valuable, multiplying you score by 2 affects you the same way.
jade isle
with an xmult joker you need to think about the composition of other factors, +mult, chips, and even joker and card placement/order
real magnet
Multiplying your mult multiplies your score by the same amount.
It's the communicative property
Regardless of 50 chips × 60 mult × 2(Xmult) or (50 chips × 60 mult) × 2(multiplying you score, the result is the same.
Divide the goal in half, you have half the ground to cover, double your score, you have half the ground to cover, 2 different ways to get to the same place
real magnet
In every situation, my example is chosen for convenience of numbers, but you can calculate the equivalent ×mult, your 30% reduction for instance, take the remaining 70%, and divide it by 100, you get roughly 1.43, the number you could multiply the score by to get the same result.
jade isle
you just don't acknowledge joker positioning and trigger order, and maybe even other effects I forget now
the math works out in this scenarios, yeah, I understand 100%
but Balatro is more than that
real magnet
So long as it isn't a card based trigger and brainstorm is out, it always works out.
jade isle
but it works differently
you can copy the effect with BS/BP when selecting the blind and then move those two for scoring for example
like Burglar
real magnet
For your example, I bring up the ×mult as a measure by which to judge how powerful the joker is, the 1% score reduction per a stone card can be directly compared to similar joker in optimal positions. If you compare it to a standard ×mult joker, you can see that it is significantly slower than similar jokers. 17.5 times slower than hologram. Of course, in not all situations ×mult going to perfectly transfer over, but since it usually does work out fine, it makes a good standpoint for comparison and balance.
jade isle
Yeah, a nice rule of thumb, but again, it glosses over joker positioning, trigger order and copying and stuff.
when those don't matter it's good to think that way to see which joker to go with during play.
but talking about a joker concept we have to think about all facettes of how a joker would interact
but it did let me think twice about the idea and I think it's too niche anyways
lyric kettle
So long as it isn't a card based trigger and brainstorm is out, it always works ...
An unconditional 2X is like lowering it by 50%
A card sharp wouldn't be a flat decrease initially, since hand 1 wouldn't get the benefits