(02-25-2015, 02:21 PM)Steel Wolf Wrote: Okay so I need a little help with how Plus works....
Could someone help me figure out--me, who sucks at the maths--how this thing works out? Â Cuz...again...suck at the maths. Â :<
Also I wanna kill King and take his stuff.
I kinda explained it piecemeal in a couple spots, but I'll try and condense it into a single post here, based on my understanding:
Normally, the basic rule of TT is that bigger number beats smaller number. 2 beats 1, A beats 9, and everything in-between. There's a couple variations of that in the various rulesets (Fallen Ace is a good example, where 1 > A and creates a full loop), but it is usually how it works.
However, with Plus, you get ANOTHER method for flipping cards: maff! By utilizing addition, you can overcome all sorts of cards you otherwise couldn't. And all it takes is having two cards in position to show off your maff skills.
The idea is to take one "pair" of numbers equal another "pair" of numbers, where each pair is a combination of the number on one side of your card and the adjacent number on the card next to it. If the total number of this "pair" exactly matches the total of another "pair", the two adjacent cards that made the total will become yours (if possible - you can use one of your own cards to pull off a Plus).
It was explained to me thusly:
(02-25-2015, 12:55 PM)Gegenji Wrote: The idea was that there was a card above that has a 6 as its bottom number, and a card on the right has a 7 as its left number. So, putting a card that has a 4 up top AND a 3 as its right number would plus them both, because both equal 10 (6+4 and 7+3). And, then it can combo-chain if such a thing happens with the newly flipped card and another card (or cards) adjacent to it.
In a more visible sense, let's take that card that has a 4 as its top number and a 3 on its right, with the dash being the "center" of the card since the other two numbers are irrelevant at the moment.
4
-Â 3
Now, if the bottom of the card of the card above it is 4 (all the other numbers on the card are irrelevant for this exercise), and the left of the card to the right is 3 (all other numbers again irrelevant), it won't work because the four on your card is touching the four on the above card and your card's three is touching the three of the right card. This results in an 4+4 = 8 and a 3+3 = 6, which do not match, so there is no Plus.
(02-25-2015, 02:07 PM)Gegenji Wrote: 8
4
4
- Â 3 Â 3 6
However, what if your card had the numbers swapped? Basically, it looked like this instead:
3
- 4
Well, now you will get a Plus. Why? Because the 3 on the top of your card is touching the top card's 4, and your 4 is touching the right card's 3. Both "pairs" now equal 7, which is what you need for a Plus to occur.
(02-25-2015, 02:07 PM)Gegenji Wrote: 7
4
3
- Â 4 Â 3 7
To provide another visual example, if we go back to the inital example I quoted, it'd look like this (with all extraneous numbers on the cards being irrelevant, of course):
6
4
- 3 7
With the 4 and 3 being on your card and the 6 and 7 being on their respective adjacent cards, for clarification. You're left with 6+4 = 10, and 3+7 = 10. Since both those numbers match, you get a Plus and gain control of those two adjacent cards.
Do keep in mind that this middle card in all three examples are cards you currently putting down. If, say, the card with the six bottom in the example above was put down AFTER you placed the 4/x/3/y card down, it will not suddenly become Plus'd. Instead, it will just flip your card as normal since it is the higher number.
HOWEVER, any cards that you flip WITH a Plus will also check the cards adjacent to it to see if they will cause OTHER Pluses. If there are, those cards that fit the criteria will flip and the check repeats until there are no more potential Pluses. This is the Combo, and can turn around a match quickly if you can somehow manage to cause one (which is what several of the "tactics" used against King seek to do; Plus a bunch of cards and have them Combo other cards).
(I hope that wasn't too confusing... or that Franz's more concise answer explains it clearly enough if my meandering dissertation doesn't.
)
~