Optimal deck size (corrected)

[helix2]

Curious what people think the optimal deck size is. I expect there will be quite a range. At first I was taking every card I could, but I am learning to trim. Still, I think my hands are probably too large.
(Question corrected to placate the pedantic)

[Devsman]

I think the answer to all these kinds of questions is it depends.

For example, to really utilize the Pressure Points card, you want your deck as small as possible so you draw it often. But on the other hand, using the Anger card makes your deck grow larger, and as such gets more effective as the battle goes.

[helix2]

Originally posted by Devsman X:

I think the answer to all these kinds of questions is it depends.

For example, to really utilize the Pressure Points card, you want your deck as small as possible so you draw it often. But on the other hand, using the Anger card makes your deck grow larger, and as such gets more effective as the battle goes.

To clarify, I mean the size of the deck you carry from room to room. Those extra anger cards don't carry over. So a small deck would still be preferable, to get the first one out quickly.

[mldb88]

Originally posted by helix2:

Originally posted by Devsman X:

I think the answer to all these kinds of questions is it depends.

For example, to really utilize the Pressure Points card, you want your deck as small as possible so you draw it often. But on the other hand, using the Anger card makes your deck grow larger, and as such gets more effective as the battle goes.

To clarify, I mean the size of the deck you carry from room to room. Those extra anger cards don't carry over. So a small deck would still be preferable, to get the first one out quickly.

It still really depends, and you’ll get wildly different answers on here. Personally I tend to hover around the 35-40 range most of the time, unless I’m going for a strategy that relies on hitting a specific card over and over like rampage or a claw deck. Some cards like perfected strike love stuffing your deck with specific types of cards, others really want a thin deck so you can keep hitting them to scale (rampage, anger, the dagger and feed to ensure you hit it when you have lethal, etc)

[LHGreen]

Well, if you're talking about DECK size, rather than hand size, it's supposedly around 25-40. You want more than 25 so that you aren't too crippled by large numbers of status effects and/or curses getting added to your deck, but you also want less than 40 so you can have some reliability and consistency in your draws. However, different players have different styles. Some people will gravitate towards thin decks, some towards thick decks, some in the middle. This game actually gives you a lot of freedom in developing your own play style. I'm more of a 40-50 card player, and a deck that size can absolutely work and be a viable option. As can a deck with only 10, or 5, or even 2 cards. Ultimately, you just gotta do what feels right for you.

Also, while you should pass up cards occasionally, you can absolutely just take a card almost every time you're offered one and still have a viable build. I call it the "kid in a candy store" mentality (which is how I end up with 40+ card decks), and it works fine. As long as you remember to favor draws and energy a little more heavily, and avoid cards you don't need.

[helix2]

Originally posted by LHGreen:

Well, if you're talking about DECK size, rather than hand size, it's supposedly around 25-40. You want more than 25 so that you aren't too crippled by large numbers of status effects and/or curses getting added to your deck, but you also want less than 40 so you can have some reliability and consistency in your draws. However, different players have different styles. Some people will gravitate towards thin decks, some towards thick decks, some in the middle. This game actually gives you a lot of freedom in developing your own play style. I'm more of a 40-50 card player, and a deck that size can absolutely work and be a viable option. As can a deck with only 10, or 5, or even 2 cards. Ultimately, you just gotta do what feels right for you.

Also, while you should pass up cards occasionally, you can absolutely just take a card almost every time you're offered one and still have a viable build. I call it the "kid in a candy store" mentality (which is how I end up with 40+ card decks), and it works fine. As long as you remember to favor draws and energy a little more heavily, and pass on cards you don't need.

Thank you, a nice explanation of your preference, I appreciate that.
I watch what I consider 'trick' decks on YouTube and they are often down around 4-5 cards.
Your point is clear though, lots of play styles can apparently succeed.
Do you think deck size changes with class?

[Vengyr]

I think Watcher can 'get away' with taking every card more than the others, simply because her cards generally have quite high power level and don't require specific synergies.

Ironclad has exhaust cards which can somewhat negate the negatives of getting too big of a deck.

Defect has a couple of cards that benefit from deck size. Other than that, shouldn't go too thick.

Silent is the one where I'd absolutely go for smaller deck.

That's all in theory though, in practice offered rewards affect it much more than that. Sometimes you just get offered crappy cards over and over.

[mldb88]

Originally posted by Vengyr:

I think Watcher can 'get away' with taking every card more than the others, simply because her cards generally have quite high power level and don't require specific synergies.

Ironclad has exhaust cards which can somewhat negate the negatives of getting too big of a deck.

Defect has a couple of cards that benefit from deck size. Other than that, shouldn't go too thick.

Silent is the one where I'd absolutely go for smaller deck.

That's all in theory though, in practice offered rewards affect it much more than that. Sometimes you just get offered crappy cards over and over.

Silent has enough cycling to get away with somewhat larger decks at times, especially if you are given the opportunity to lean into the discard synergies. Also there’s very few objectively “crappy” cards, especially if we’re discussing A0 or early ascensions. Even later ascensions the cards aren’t really bad, there’s just less room for error with deck construction.

[Vengyr]

Originally posted by mldb88:

Originally posted by Vengyr:

I think Watcher can 'get away' with taking every card more than the others, simply because her cards generally have quite high power level and don't require specific synergies.

Ironclad has exhaust cards which can somewhat negate the negatives of getting too big of a deck.

Defect has a couple of cards that benefit from deck size. Other than that, shouldn't go too thick.

Silent is the one where I'd absolutely go for smaller deck.

That's all in theory though, in practice offered rewards affect it much more than that. Sometimes you just get offered crappy cards over and over.

Silent has enough cycling to get away with somewhat larger decks at times, especially if you are given the opportunity to lean into the discard synergies. Also there’s very few objectively “crappy” cards, especially if we’re discussing A0 or early ascensions. Even later ascensions the cards aren’t really bad, there’s just less room for error with deck construction.

By "crappy" I didn't mean "never worth picking", but rather "requiring very specific synergies to be any good". Silent and Defect in particular have plenty of these. Reprogram deck CAN work, but you probably would only take it in very specific circumstances.

Also, all classes but Watcher have a lot of bad common attacks, which only serve the purpose to carry you through act 1. Watcher is better because her power level is just higher, and those "bad common attacks" can be worth picking even later on.

[wilky]

I usually aim for about 20 cards by the end of Act 1, about 25 cards by the end of Act 2, and about 30 cards by the end of Act 3. But it honestly depends on a lot of factors. I've had decks that won with 40+ cards (because maybe I took the Apparitions / Bite events, etc.). Then I've had other decks that won with 20 or fewer cards. But I think most of my decks end up around 25-30.

Usually in Act 1, I take a lot of core damage cards (things like Pommel Strike, or Cut Thru Fate, or Crush Joints/Sash Whip, or Go For The Eyes/Beam Cell or Compile Driver). And I usually start building toward a theme... like maybe if I'm Ironclad, I start taking STR or Exhaust cards. Maybe if I'm Silent, I start adding Poison or Shiv cards, etc.

Usually in Act 2, I look to cement the theme that I started in Act 1, and in particular I'm looking for rarer quality cards and/or upgraded cards. Also, I'm usually keeping in mind my block density throughout Acts 2-3. It's easy to fall into the temptation of always picking damage cards for card rewards, but I usually try to maintain about 30% block cards in my deck (give or take).

Usually in Act 3, the deck should ideally be pretty cemented already, so the main thing I'm probably looking to add is card draw (or removals of basic cards). Things like Skim/Aggregate, Adrenaline Rush or Offering, Coolheaded, Acrobatics/upgraded Prepared, etc.

[pgames-food]

hi i find that a Deck size of somewhere between 1200 and 3000 works best for me
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198047650167/images/?appid=646570&sort=newestfirst&browsefilter=myfiles&view=imagewall

of course, your combos and abilities will get diluted if not scaled up, but usually if you add cards with mechanics that your deck is needing, you cant really go wrong, except that the more you add the more memory the game takes (which can lead to lags and crashes), so i usually stick around the 1500 mark.

for Hand size though, im beginning to prefer cards that allow drawing, and max hand size increases to about 10, but "not" extra card drawing at the start of turns... mostly only because a lot of the times i try to draw extra cards, they fall off into the discard pile as no room to fetch them or draw them. but i have a solution here for that :) (fingers crossed)

"The Absorber Mod" :)
https://steamcommunity.com/app/646570/discussions/2/3757723993437998660/

[helix2]

Wow, thanks for the screen caps. That's really something.

[pgames-food]

:o)

[Khor]

On average, around 30. For math reasons
Then, if you "can", the smaller the better
but it`s VERY run-dependent

Let`s say that, again on average, if you`re routinely ending up with less than 20 or more than 40 cards, you`re not playing optimally

[onomastikon]

Originally posted by LHGreen:

Well, if you're talking about DECK size, rather than hand size, it's supposedly around 25-40. You want more than 25 so that you aren't too crippled by large numbers of status effects and/or curses getting added to your deck, but you also want less than 40 so you can have some reliability and consistency in your draws. However, different players have different styles. Some people will gravitate towards thin decks, some towards thick decks, some in the middle. This game actually gives you a lot of freedom in developing your own play style. I'm more of a 40-50 card player, and a deck that size can absolutely work and be a viable option. As can a deck with only 10, or 5, or even 2 cards. Ultimately, you just gotta do what feels right for you.

Also, while you should pass up cards occasionally, you can absolutely just take a card almost every time you're offered one and still have a viable build. I call it the "kid in a candy store" mentality (which is how I end up with 40+ card decks), and it works fine. As long as you remember to favor draws and energy a little more heavily, and avoid cards you don't need.

Just curious, since I've seen many people claim that "top players" (e.g. players who consistantly win at A20) swear on thin decks: Do you play on A20 with 40+ card decks?

[LHGreen]

Originally posted by onomastikon:

Just curious, since I've seen many people claim that "top players" (e.g. players who consistantly win at A20) swear on thin decks: Do you play on A20 with 40+ card decks?

IIRC, top players don't swear on thin decks, they prefer moderate-sized (20+) decks. And yeah, I have maybe a handful of runs with thin decks, and the rest are thick decks, all the way up to A20. Recently, I started a new file and tried doing the lower ascensions (0-4) with each character without having all their unlocks, and while there were problems with forgetting which cards/relics I wouldn't see in those runs, I still managed a 90%+ win rate easily enough (I always have trouble with Watcher at first, I need time to get the hang of her) and defeated the heart as soon as it showed up, all with my usual play style. It may be "sub-optimal", just like ultra thin decks are, but it still works, just like ultra thin decks do. You have a lot of freedom in this game to develop your own play style, even with how things are structured.