Gem Tower Defense

Comments

Name:

type hello

216 - 2020-02-28, 11:05 AM

I had another interesting run, but fail at 160, leaking 2, one was slowed by shappire, the next one wasn't, so they got too close for 7 auto-cliks. Only 17 EE, but if didn't get that unlucky leak, and got few more EE, it would be easy 196+. Interesting was getting 1-turn jade bettwen wawes 6 and 7 (10% normal chance), and GO in wawe 20 (after 19), just after last chance upgrades - first 2 gems was perf.o., also one of remaining was perf.emerald, but in that rare situation i don't take emerald :). No early EG, first one around 35.
Until wawe 90(+40 repicks) i had only 3 EE, after that i got next 10 quite fast, then again almost no emeralds. I build 12 jades(max amount that i allow in my runs, 3 was 1-turn).
In 159 i got next GO(wasn't usefull). I had no one other Great gem.
Leaks:
44	2
48	3
52	4
56	2
60	2
64	2
68	4
72	3
76	4
80	4	
84	5	
88	5	
92	4 (3 EE)
96	2 (1st Black Opal)	
100	1
104	1
108	3
112	2
116	2
120	1
124	1
128	1
132	1
136	1
140	2
144	1 (2nd BO )
148	2
152	0 (16 EE only, good stun RNG)
156	0
160	2 and die

Math (216) - 2020-02-25, 09:30 PM

I decided to do some math:

explaination of 1:652 chance for Great Opal(in 1 turn):

you need 2+ perf.o. or 4+ flawless, there is 10% perfect chance and 8 types - each time you place gem there is 1:80 chance it will be perf.o.(everyone know that).
There is formula for getting (extractly) n succeses with A chance in k tries: 
A^n * (1-A)^(k-n) * combinations(k,n)
,so 
succes chance (A) = 1:80 = 0.0125
fail chance =              0.9875
combinations(5,2) = 10

0.0125^2 * 0.9875^3 * 10 = 0.0015046 (1:664),
but this is chance for extractly 2 perf.o., you need add chance for 3,4,5.
But there is faster way - calculate chance for 0 and 1.

0.9875^5 * 1=               0.9390431
0.9875^4 * 0.0125 * 5 =     0.0594331
1 - 0.9390431 - 0.0594331 = 0.0015238 (1:656)

chance for flawless opal = 3:80 = 0.0375

0.0375^4 * 0.9625 * 5 = 0.0000095 (not much, but i got that once, long time ago)
0.0375^5 * 1 =          0.0000001 (even a bit less, should be 074 instead 1, but let's keep the same rounding. You think it cannot happens? Well once i got 5 normal topazes... The same chance for that, such as for any of 24 flawed-flawless gems).

because you cannot get 4 flawless and 2 perf. in 1-tunr, you can just add those chances.
0.0015238 + 0.0000096 = 0.0015334 (1:652).

Intuitive way to estimate (dont use it on exams :)
Rupert said if you got perf.o in first gem (1:80 chance), you have 5%(4:80) for GO(i correct him for 4,9%, but 5 is rounded). if you got if as 2nd gem (it's(79/80):80 chance, but use 1:80 for easy calc.), you have 3:80, etc. So (4+3+2+1)/80/80 = 1:640, not bad estimation.

So each time you place 5 gems(with max upgraded chances) there is 1:652 for GO.

Chance for getting GO in multiple turn:
just caclulate  1- (chance for not getting GO)^ turns.
you got last chance upgrade after wawe 19 and ussually i save gold for this.
Examples:
until wawe 44, and 10 repicks used:  44-19+10 = 35 chances,
1-(651/652)^35 =  5.23%
wawe 70+ 20 r. = 10.33%
wawe 96+ 40 r. = 16.44%
wawe 110+ 50 r = 19.46% (that why i said around 20% chance before lose)
wawe 110+ 60 r = 20.69%
wawe 140+100 r = 28.77%
wawe 176+130 r = 35.63%
wawe 196+130 r = 37.58%
wawe 196+160 r = 40.38%
wawe 196+200 r = 43.94%

,so i was suprised that WGW says he gets GO so rarely in 196 runs, it should be statistically once per 3 games at least(depends of repicks, if less than 50, once per 4 games)

Uber Stone chance:
(0.0125^4 * 0.9875 * 5 + 0.0125^5) * 8(any color) = 1:1034343

Specyfic special gem 1-turn chance(with perfect gem, except paraiba):
1 perf.gem + 1 2nd part + 1 3rd part:
0.0125 * 0.0375^2 * 0.9125^2 (any other gem) * 10(combinations) * 6(permutations)=0.0008782
1+2+1:
0.0125 * 0.0375^3 * 0.9125* 5 *24/2 (you can't change order of the same gems)=0.0000361
1+1+2: the same, 
1+2+2:
0.0125 * 0.0375^4 *120/4 =0.0000007
1+3+1:
0.0125 * 0.0375^4 * 1 *120/6 = 0.0000005
1+1+3 same,
2+1+1:
0.0125^2 * 0.0375^2 * 0.9125 *5 *24/2=0.0000120
2+2+1:
0.0125^2 * 0.0375^3 * 120/4=0.0000002
2+1+2 same,
3+1+1:
0.0125^3 * 0.0375^2*120/6=0.0000001 (even less)

total: 0.000964 (1:1036)

Average DPS of some (lvl 0) gems:
EG:
180/0.75 * 1.3(avg crit) = 312
vs 1-armor ametyst weakness unit : 312 * 0.9434 *  1.75 = 515
buffed by great + black opal (x2.8)  : 1442

EE:
150/0.7*1.45 = 310.7
310*0.9434*1.5 = 439
*2.8 = 1231

ABS:
200/0.8*1.3=325
325 * 0.9434 * 0.8 = 245
*2.8 = 686 (+500*flamestrkes active, assuming 1.25 avg flamesrike active is 1311 DPS).

Star Yellow shapphire:
180/0.8=225
212
594 (but huge splash)

Paraiba:
225/0.75=300
283
792 (+frost nova, but mana allows for 1 nova/2.5s, so 100 dps only)

Uranium:
256 (not 260, its bugged. In adddition it dmg strange irregullary (in my observations))
256
256

Malachite:
81.8
115
324 (in all tagrets)

Silver:
150
141
396

Great Ametyst:
375
619
1733 ,the big problem of GA is fact this cannot get many kils.

Great Aqua:
560
528
1479 (too low for that range IMO, many Great gems should be stronger)

Great Topaz:
250
250*0.9434*1.2 = 283
792 (x7 targets)

Great Ruby:
280
211
591 (x3 targets)

Great Sapphire:
200
188
528 (this gem also sucks, but if i got it, i ussually take it anyway)

Great Opal:

180
169
475

Great Emerald:
250
353
990 (IMO poison should benefit from kills, but it doesn't)

(Lucky) jade:
180.7
170
477

Red Crystal:
140
232
650

216 - 2020-02-25, 07:10 AM

Cleetus - 2020-02-25, 01:20 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-21, 09:55 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-21, 09:31 PM

216 - 2020-02-21, 08:45 AM

216 - 2020-02-21, 08:42 AM

216 - 2020-02-21, 07:35 AM

I did it. removed few rocks in 405 and some 1,6M hp ground ememies finally leaks. Game needs balance after 196, as i said eariel. 
I got crazy luck in getting perf.e., but doing it is possible with average emerald gain. Just continue adding e.e after 196 and game can last forever. in 252 game i had only few more emeralds than statistically should be, and i could not lose, but i didn't want to play forever, so i stopped adding e.e.

@Rupert The Great: i think you can defeat 196, especially that you said you got to 196. Actually i never failed after 140, maybe i have better luck(leaking 2 sometimes). But make sure your emeralds can stun enemies property. The ememy which first appear on map have higher prioryty for towers, and you can't change it. So place emeralds rather in max distace from path, so they can range only short fragment of path, preventing too many emeralds to hit 1 target - let's 3-4 e.e. to focus on one ememy. There is some places which can be target by more emeralds(4-6 ,because those places are too good) - usually between ckeckpoint 2(c2) and mid, betwwen mid and c3, and in massive stun zones around the c6. i place a lot of e.e in spaces between c6 and c2, between c6 and c3 - they can range 2 different places. You know that e.e should be spreaded, so place some at upper part of map too(should be at least 1 stun zone between c3 and c4(max 3-4 e.e per 1 emeny here), between c4 and c5, and some in long line after c5), but remeber that speading single emeralds increase chance of stack, because they stun only for short time(ussually, stunning is actually very random). After my 140 fail, i don't place much of them in range 100 of mid, max 3-5.
Between mid and c6 many emeralds should range(6+), enemies shouldn't escaping from here, also after c6(most e.e here also range around c3, but you can add few "emergency" emeralds, which range only after c6, i ussually do this around/after 196, because not enough emeralds. i don't ussually have good stun zones before c2, i had some in this game(1-2 flyers getting killed here), but i didn't fell it help me so much(that don't means you can't build e.e here at all).

Remember about slowing enemies! jades, yellow star,uranium(bugged with slow range:(,as i said in older comment), perf.e.(temporary) are good. Best slower id Great Emerald, but ussualy i prefer take perf.e. anyway. Unless i got between c1 and c5 and don't have stunners around c1, so it can slow all 10 flyers at start. You want to kill enemies on c2-c3 line before other get close to mid again!

Good luck on next run with GO!

216 - 2020-02-21, 05:48 AM

20% was an eastimated chance for getting GO before level +-110 , when you ussually lose without GO due to stack. with GO(and black opal)i almost never leak 3 units (well, once i leaked 3 and die in 140 with GO and 17-18 e.e, and leaking 0 in 136, it's was my biggest fail before defeating 196 fist time - reason was probably too many emeralds had mid in range - 1 got stunned perfectly on mid and rest passes without stun, as i remember). with out GO i leaking 3-4, so chance to fail is much bigger, i have never past 136 without GO. Around 130 enemies don't need to be stacked in 1 plae to lose - if they are too close autocliked don't save you. SO in most cases you need GO before 110.

Chance for GO is 1:652 per placing 5 gems, so math is simple :  1- (651/652)^(lvl-19+repicks),
assuming you take last chance upgrade after lvl 19 (there is small chance for GO before 20, but only once in my life i gor GO from 4 flawless, let's ignore that, calculated 1:652 include that event).
until 110 i use usually +- 50 repicks,so 20% is good estimation.

I plan to lose intentionally after defeating wawe 404.

In 396, i got another dangerous situation(just while writting this comment), but remeber that i could build 20+ e.e at this point, so losing "normally" at this point is almost impossible.

in my 252 run i remember i had not much worse time than on your high scores(at wawe 196), 24k s probably.

I really encourage to do emeralds runs, instead 196 runs- maybe in 90+% cases you fail early, but it's better than have 100% chance to die at 196.

wawe 399, over 1 000 000 000 score already!

WGW - 2020-02-21, 04:18 AM

@216:  I'm with Rupert The Great in being nervous on your behalf about a power failure or browser crash before you get to post your current game's high score-- it would completely blow away the previous record, which was level 211, by a/aznist, who also got to level 203 twice.  But that's it.  No one else has ever legitimately beaten level 196 except a/aznist, and now you (his/her high scores were posted with the name "aznist", but there are many comments on this page from the same person under the name "a").

I saved a copy of the old high score list before the game's designer, Peter Holko, wiped it clean last year.  Here's a screenshot of a's legit scores past level 196, but note that ALL other high scores higher on the list than my best score are very obvious fakes-- it's apparently very easy to spam the high score list if someone really wants to, according to Peter, though I have no clue how people do it.  He blocked the IP address of the most frequent offender, though, so I've been very pleased to see no fake high scores are currently on the list.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/6klqxtpeetqkv0k/GTD%20top%20scores%2C%20pre-2019.jpg?dl=0

I'm genuinely impressed by your very smart approach to emerald runs, which is very clearly working for you better than anyone else has ever managed before!  The challenge I've set for myself to keep the game interesting, even though I know my strategy will ALWAYS lose at level 196, is to optimize runs to reduce the time it takes to get to level 196, which means a higher score.  The best score I posted on the now-wiped previous high score list is still my fastest level 195 run to date-- I came pretty close to beating it once on the current high score list, but without some exceptionally great luck, I'm not confident that I'll ever get to level 196 any faster than I did before the high scores were wiped!

One question for you, if you don't mind (actually I have tons of questions, but I'll stick to just one for now):  You mentioned a 20% chance of getting a great opal by level 196 and I'm curious how you calculated that (I've never been great with probability calculations).  Going purely by the empiricial evidence of my having played thousands and thousands of GTD runs, that number feels much higher than what I've experienced.  It seems to me that it's not possible to calculate the odds on getting a great opal without factoring in repicks, which are entirely dependent on how many jades you build.  So it feels to me like a fairly complex probability calculation to determine the odds of getting a great opal by level 195; but I would estimate the rate of getting a great opal by level 195, again based only on my actual experience playing the game rather than a more abstract, mathematical probability calculation, would put the odds of getting a great opal by level 195 is a lot closer to 1% (if not lower).  I've found picking a great opal to be fairly rare, even using a strategy where I build up enough gold from jades to generally be able to "skip" (allow all enemies to leak) all levels from 165 or so to level 195 (that's what gives my runs the biggest speed boost, by skipping as many late levels with gold as possible).  Part of what has put me off of emerald runs is specifically the need for a great opal, since the prevailing wisdom has been that it's probably not possible to beat level 196 without one (though this is not definitively proven by any means).

Anyhow, once again, I REALLY hope you don't lose your current game due to a crash or power failure-- I'm looking forward to see your score posted soon!

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-20, 08:17 PM

216 - 2020-02-20, 05:03 PM

216 - 2020-02-20, 08:17 AM

42 e.e. are stunning enemies good enough(ofc they can't keep 10 enemies stunned forever, but long enough to kill), even with small mistake in positioning(and i can make much more of them, but now i making only dmg gems now - ABSs and EGs), I said eariel i probably will have to lose intentionally, flying units have 400k+ hp only(grounds 1,2M), because linear growth(as i said eariel), my gems still are getting more kills(main EG have 441,many EG and e.e. have around 70, GO got 128, my fist jade 99...) and i still adding new ABSs(but i have problem with space for gems now), so i can kill fist few flyers, before anything reach mid after chepoint 5. Repicks costs almost 7k now(i have 200k+ gold lelt), it looks like a sanbox(but no 10k lives).
wawe 309 now.
I also trought my 252 run would be like that, but 31 e.e(better located a bit) wasn't enough, i stopped building them too fast... but i least i could submit score.
Generally defeating 196 is simillar to 200, 204, etc., so if build some more e.e after succesfully 196 attempt, and you won't die quick in few next flying wawes game will become endless.
i'm suprised that nobody did it in past 10+ years(maybe did, but cannot sumbit score :)

What is needed to beat 196 (excert some experience):
-not bad start(later it almost doesn't mater, but getting early EG helps around 100)

-Great Opal,before you die in 96-196 (about 20% chance, if you can survive longer is more). with that amount of emeralds which i got(it was below 1% chance for that amount!) i'm thinking about possibility of doing it without, but let say it's now theory. GO it's not only 1.3x more dps than Perf.O., it's also more efficienty for stunners.

- at least average emerald gain(more than 50% chance). Ofc more emeralds - more chance for succes. Lets say you can do 160 repick before 196. I estimated it's 7,4% chance for p.e in 5 gems(don't forget you can combine), so (196-19+160)*0.074= 24.9 , i managed to succes with 24 e.e, but i died in 204(with 26 e.e, as you can see in highscores).

- don't getting unlucky struck in 96+(sometimes even before, when 3 enemies are too close to each other). If you got GO and build black opal you shouldn't leak more than 2 around wawe 100, even with not much emeralds(but few are needed), because if you got less e.e, you probably have more other dmg gems, like EG. 
E.E. are more and more important later.

Anyway positioning of e.e is most important. I don't think i found optimal strat, i still trying to optimize(maybe writting "wawe 196 simulator" in C++ or other language would be a good idea).

@Rupert The Great: did you really think that RC reduce armor only to 1 unit, like EG?

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-19, 08:45 PM

216 - 2020-02-19, 07:05 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-19, 06:53 PM

216 - 2020-02-19, 05:29 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-19, 04:52 PM

216 - 2020-02-19, 01:21 PM

216 - 2020-02-19, 08:31 AM

After more than week of bad luck, i got GO again(in wawe 28, 80+ kills in 196), in addition to most lucky ever emerald gain(35 perf.e. before 196, much more than needed). So, i don't think i finish this run quickly. I leaked 1 in 168 with 27 e.e, so i definitely did mistake with positioning them (not enough stunners that range fragments of path after checkpoint 5, before mid and around checkpoint 4, so enemies was escaping too easy. Some important positions was taken by other gems, but amount of e.e fixed the problem anyway).
In this run i really had problem with too much emeralds :), because problem with getting other parts of e.e and i had too litle other gems, so my dmg was bad in general (also bad time, but beter than Rupert times, in 176 i had 25k seconds, are You doing too long maze?)

leaks:
44	0
48	3
52	3
56	3
60	3
64	4
68	3
72	3
76	4
80	3
84	3
88	4
92	1 ( 1st black opal created)
96	2
100	2
104	2
108	1
112	2
116	1
120	0
124	1
128	2
132	2* (maybe 1, i forgot to write)
136	1
140	0
144	0
148	0
152	1
156	2
160	0
164	0
168	1
172+	0

i'm currently in 211.
@Rupert The Great: you said once that you build 7 Red Crystals, what was a reason to do this? Six 1-turn RC?

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-13, 07:11 PM

eze - 2020-02-13, 06:14 PM

216 - 2020-02-12, 06:52 AM

@WGW thanks for explaination! I trought that order of placing gems matters in case of this bug(because bugs doesn't happens random). Another downside(IMO) of getting GO too early is that it will take too many kills(we want more kills on our egyptian golds(actually emeralds also have good dmg) or good aoe/multi target gems like Great Topaz(i didn't got them in my both 196+ runs, but i like them), maybe single-target dmg is more important in 196+ runs, because ussually you need kill first 2-3 enemies before other(s) gets close to checkpoint 6 to allow towers(emeralds) to switch target, keeping 10 ememies stunlocked for enough long is unlikely). 
About defeating 196 twice in short time: if you don't count resets/fails before wawe 40 it was literally next game after 252 run, i wasn't excepted anythig. Except getting e.gold in wawe 20, i had nothing good/unusual at first 100 wawes, i was thinking about ingoring it and starting new(only reason why i continue was good amount af kills on my egyptian gold), i was leaking a lot in 96-104(gj autocliker :), but in 106(?) i got GO, then i built black opal. I had only 8 emelads in 108, but i leaked only 1(maybe 2).
Also i got lucky of getting emeralds after 170-180(i had 18 around 180). i had 200k gold, so planned repick a lot, but even it wans't much needed(actually i think losing in 204 with 200k gold was a mistake). So afert few months of trying i successed twice within 5 days.
@Rupert The Great:
Math correction: if you got perf.o. in fist gem, you have 4 chances 1.25% ,so it's not 5% but 1-0.9875^4 = 4,9% . remeber you can get more than 2 perf.o.(i got 3 twice in my life i think, probalby on sanbox).

WGW - 2020-02-12, 12:04 AM

WGW - 2020-02-11, 11:57 PM

I should clarify what I meant about all opals being bugged, not just the black opals-- I didn't explain it properly at all.  What I meant, really, is that all the opals are bugged, from chipped to great opals, and Black Opals, though the bug exhibits itself somewhat differently with Black Opals.

With all opals other than the Black Opal (including Great Opals), if you place a gem within its range later, it will still get the speed buff from the existing opal.  And yes, if you place another inferior opal range within range of other gems ALREADY boosted by a higher opal, their buffs get bumped down to the lower opal you just placed-- this behavior is a bit hard to puzzle out, but it absolutely isn't random, inconsistent, or something that only happens "sometimes".  Here's how it works:

Let's say you have a jade built, and put a great opal within range of it, giving it a 50% speed buff.  Because the jade already existed on the board when you placed the great opal, it will never lose its full 50% spped boost, no matter how many inferior opals you place within range of the jade later.

But let's say you build a dark emerald a few turns AFTER placing the great opal.  The dark emerald, of course, gets the 50% speed boost from the already placed great opal.  BUT if you NOW put down, e.g., a normal opal within range of both the jade and the dark emerald, the jade's speed boost remains frozen at 50% (because it was already on the board when the great opal was plced), while only the dark emerald's speed boost will downgrade to the normal opal's boost of only 20%.  Basically, opals (other than the black opal) don't just boost the cooldown of gems, they also determine a sort of "floor" boost for already placed gems within range, which prevents later, inferior opals from affecting their existing speed boosts; On the other hand, any gem within range of an opal, but placed on the board AFTER that opal was placed, WILL have their speed boosts negatively affected by any inferior later opals placed within range of it.

This is just about the only downside to getting a great opal really early in the game-- you have to be very careful about where you put any opal from that point on, since most of your special gems will be built after the great opal, and therefore are vulnerable to having their 50% speed buff downgraded!  (Of course, once you get the inferior opal off the board by doing a "Combine Special" with it, any gems whose speed boosts were being negatively affected by the inferior opal will revert to the full 50% great opal boost.)

Somehow I doubt I made any of this any clearer.  :)

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-11, 08:34 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-11, 07:50 PM

216 - 2020-02-11, 04:06 PM

a - 2020-02-11, 03:47 PM

216 - 2020-02-11, 02:35 PM

Joaquin Phoenix - 2020-02-11, 01:57 PM

216 - 2020-02-11, 01:02 PM

WGW - 2020-02-11, 12:46 PM

216 - 2020-02-11, 06:37 AM

Joaquin Phoenix - 2020-02-11, 12:45 AM

Joaquin Phoenix - 2020-02-10, 10:17 PM

a - 2020-02-10, 09:33 PM

Joaquin Phoenix - 2020-02-10, 09:31 PM

Joaquin Phoenix - 2020-02-10, 08:11 PM

216 - 2020-02-10, 07:20 PM

ok, with hello it works, so i need to write it again...
@mh:
emeralds runs are similar to normal, but you need to keep perfect emeralds whenever possible (with rare exceptions, when you got great opal in the same turn for example), build more jades than ussually for gold (more repicks - more emeralds, try 7 -12 jades, i used 160+ repicks in my first 196+ game) and make a bit shorther maze(but long enough to kill ground units) - keep more good locations for gems.
Positions of enchanted emeralds are the most important - dont spam them on mid because all will hit 1 unit, while others passes without getting stunned. i recommed to try emerald strat. in sandbox first to find some good configurations of emeralds(i played a lot on sandbox before i attempt real runs - i managed to get lvl 200+ with full 10000 lives).
Slowing flyers in also very important, jades are good for slow, but sometimes they focused on 1 stunned enemy, so i make few yellow shapphires - they don't slow to minimum speed, but still better than full 6.92 speed

It's extremely unlikely to beat 196 without Great Opal (maybe with 35-40 emeralds, but chance for getting 35+ perfect e. before wawe 196+160 repicks is around 1%), so place gems carefully and keep free spaces on mid for G.O.

,so emerald runs:
wawes 1 - 20:
Start with malachite( you can start with silver if you want, but malachite is just better - emerald dmg get 1.50x bonus aganist ametyst weakness), build maze(not too long) and keep parts of specials, that you want buil later (if i can take only chipped gem/flawed ruby i reset game).Let your malachite get most kills(kills by not special gems are wasted). You may build few jades, try get red crystal quick (in good position around mid), because single vivid malachite isn't strong enough for wawes 12, 16 (i often lose in this wawes).
wawes 20-25:
After last chance upgrade try build egyptian gold in good location as fast as possible( i repick if don't get any perfect gem), perf. emerald have higher priority tha ametyst, but if got 2nd perf. ametyst and you dont have flawless you can downgrade it. I got a gold in wawe 20 in my 204 lvl run and it has 390+ kills in 196. getting fast ench.e. and blood stone is also good.
There possible to build good special before wawe 20, but it reqiues luck -getting perfect gem is not all( you may use repick if u got perfect gem early).
My earielst specials: gold -wawe 18, paraiba -14, BS -15 (dark)emerald - 16
wawes 25-40:
Try get more egyptian golds/ ench.e,also build other specials(wait with black opal) except for ABSOLUTELY USELESS pink/perfect/great diamond(those gems are worse than rocks, they can steal few kills). make sure you have red crystal and your main gems are buffed by (perfect) opal.
wawes 41-95:
Aave some gold for lives - this shouldn't be problem since you kills give 25 at this point. build few jades, ofc continue creating emeralds/e.golds. Also blood stones are nice( i make 2 for aoe ussually and upgrade rest, ancient BS works well only with stunners, also dmg from multiple flamestrikes stacks).
wawes 96-195:
You can lose at this point in any flying wawe if you got unlucky stack, use autoclicker(i lost 1 or 2 days ago game with GO in lvl 104 because i did't turn on autoclicker and leak (probably only)2 very close flyers, today i lost in 88 becase i moved mouse while trying click fast lives..., so maybe use it even before 96).
You really want to have GO in mid, without it chance to fail early is much bigger.
Also build black opal - leaking a bit less, less chance to fail, but make sure you gems are still buffed after removing first perf.o.
After black opal build more jades - you will get a LOT of gold, so USE it to repick and force more good gems(mainly emeralds). stop building egyptian golds when you have +-10 of them - all point in path should be in range of at lest 1 e.gold( as well as red crystal - 2 are ussully enough, but i always hope i got it in 1 move(0,3% chance), so i dont hurry with building it, but before 196 it should be done.)
You may build also few ancient BS, stunning is more important than dmg, but you cant probalbly get always part of ench.e.
Don't use perfect gems as last gem of specials, because is hard to control position of them this way(except for first gems around wawe 20.).
wawe 196+:
do anything you want (you "win" anyway), i fell like game can last forever if continue spamming emeralds( in my 252 run i had 4 perfect e. on map, so i could make more e.e, but didn't except lose with 31 e.e.)
the lowest amount of e.e while defeating 196 was 24 in my case, but lower is possible with better stun RGN( or better positions than i :)

i hope i helped a bit and someone else get 196+, it's not as hard as i trought a month ago (but still not easy). If you have more questions you can ask me here.

Good luck with getting great opals! 
(0,17% chance)

Joaquin Phoenix - 2020-02-10, 05:52 PM

216 - 2020-02-10, 05:36 PM

WGW - 2020-02-10, 03:43 PM

WGW - 2020-02-10, 03:39 PM

mh - 2020-02-10, 04:15 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-02-10, 01:07 AM

WGW - 2020-02-07, 06:40 PM

WGW - 2020-02-07, 06:33 PM

WGW - 2020-02-07, 06:32 PM

@a: Oh, absolutely, I will get in touch with Peter before I really start to dig into this as a project.  Honestly, I would vastly prefer it if he was able to relaunch the game on an alternate platform himself.  But last we were in contact a few months back, he said he's been way too busy to work on the game (which is why he wasn't able to finish the iPhone version).

I would benefit enormously from the knowledge of anyone with ANY real experience developing games if I really end up trying to tackle this.  I've only really ever undertaken one major game project in my life-- a computer game of an old TV game show called "Blockbusters" which I made only for my own amusement and spent more hours on than you can possibly imagine.  Not nearly as many as I've spent playing GTD, but still an unimaginable number. . . . ;)

I was very happy with how it turned out, but the hundreds of hours I put into that project unfortunately aren't going to offer much useable experience in working on GTD because of the lunatic platform I used.  Out of pure laziness over finding and learning an actually remotely appropriate platform to develop a game in, I made the singularly insane decision to instead just program it in the one platform I'm expert in: Microsoft Access (most of my career was as an MS Access developer).  I have to believe that I'm maybe  the only human being in history to be crazy enough-- and have enough time to burn-- to even attempt such a thing.  :)

So if Peter's interested in working with me-- or even better, just doing it himself-- I'm all for it.  I knew that this would be absolutely undoable for me unless I figured out the pathfinding algorithm, which I have, but I could still use any help I can get! We'll see what he says.

a - 2020-02-07, 04:00 PM

eze - 2020-02-06, 02:41 PM

Peter Holko - 2020-02-06, 12:15 AM

emq - 2020-02-05, 06:30 AM

MATT - 2020-02-03, 04:46 PM

eze - 2020-02-02, 12:16 PM

eze - 2020-01-31, 12:39 PM

WGW - 2020-01-29, 12:50 AM

WGW - 2020-01-29, 12:49 AM

WGW - 2020-01-29, 12:47 AM

Good news in that I've completely cracked the problem of figuring out the pathfinding algorithm, so the odds on my being able to create a non-Flash version of this game just went up considerably.  :)  That said, I have no experience with any real game development platform-- I actually tested out the pathfinding algorithm in MS Excel, of all things!

If I ever do manage an attempt at reprogramming this game, though, rest assured that there are a few changes I'd want to make:
1) No more "buying lives"-- it's totally pointless.  Escaped enemies should just subtract directly from your total gold, and then you run out of gold, you lose.  This would completely eliminate games ending because you can't click the "Buy Lives" button quickly enough, and also prevent games from ending after level 195 if just ONE enemy escapes.

2) I'd definitely add an option to speed the game up after you make your turn.

3) I'd eliminate the buggy behavior of some of the gems-- primarily that opals only boost gems *already placed* on the board.

I've got almost a year to figure this out. . . My hope is that there's someone else out there who knows a good platform akin to Flash to develop this in-- I'm wide open to suggestion!

WGW - 2020-01-29, 12:41 AM

lement - 2020-01-26, 01:09 PM

madjen86 - 2020-01-26, 01:03 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-26, 02:08 AM

dubman - 2020-01-26, 01:57 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-25, 08:36 PM

emq - 2020-01-24, 09:34 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-23, 01:18 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-23, 01:12 AM

@EZE, Well done! I start to use auto click about level 100 when two air troops superimposed can kill you.  WGW probably told you the perfect opal is very important.  Try and get all gems covered by it.  If you can get great opal, this is stunning.  When selecting gems be careful not to race through.  If you get a perfect opal (during selection) then strategically place the other selections near the middle in case it gives you another perfect opal (then you have the great opal - best gem ever).  Black opals are also critical.  Get first one around lvl 100.  Try to get the easiest gem last when selecting gem recipes as this give you the best chance of getting it where you want it.  Also get 1 aquamarine as it speeds up the game as ground troops get hammered.  It also has big attack for air troops. Get 1 of each gem recipe except perhaps star ruby. Try to have them near the cross in the game.  massive kill zone.  The gems u want multiple are Dark Emerald, Egyptian gold, lucky Jade and red crystal only.

EZE - 2020-01-22, 02:42 PM

EZE - 2020-01-21, 07:55 PM

EZE - 2020-01-21, 07:28 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-19, 09:34 PM

WGW - 2020-01-19, 06:33 PM

@a: Thanks for the pointer to the code for the Dota 2 version of GTD.  I'm sorry for taking so long to respond to about this point, but I was pretty sure I wouldn't get much out of viewing the raw code, especially considering that it's in a language I don't even know.  But even if it were in a programming language I understood decently well, puzzling out the conceptual LOGIC of the pathfinding routine by looking at raw code would be pretty difficult-- not impossible, but difficult, if I had no sort of handle on the underlying concepts.  But. . .

You did, though, give me the encouragement I needed to just do a general internet search on pathfinding algorithms, and it didn't take me more than 5 minutes to find what I was looking for.  I'm in only the earliest stages of poking around with this, but I completely GET it, logic-wise, have already done a good amount of testing in the one programming language I'm really fluent in, and my first stab at coding a pathfinding routine seems to be working well (I need to do a lot more testing, but it's looking good).  The rest of recreating GTD is a piece of cake compared to figuring out how to replicate the pathfinding-- pathfinding is just not a concept I ever had to think about it before in any prior programming I've done-- but unsurprisingly, much smarter people than me figured this out a very long time ago, using pretty simple logic.  So maybe I can get an alternate version of GTD before Flash disappears.  We'll see.  Figuring out how to recreate the pathfinding is just one of the obstacles.  :)

Bad enough we're facing the end of GTD when Flash support ends this year, but my main PC runs on Windows 7, which is now officially no longer supported by Microsoft, so my whole computer is a ticking time bomb. . . at least, so I've been led to believe by Microsoft.

WGW - 2020-01-19, 06:19 PM

AAAARGH!!!!  Literally a half dozen games in a row over the last couple of weeks ruined due to Chrome crashing== crashing not just the browser, mind you, but hard crashing Windows entirely, reuiring a full system reboot.  I finally got a run going yesterday where Chrome seemed to be behaving itself, smooth sailing through level 182, only to lose at level 183 due to some sort of inexplicable autoclick glitch.  There was no reason whatsoever I should have lost that game before level 196.  Sigh.

In the meantime, I'm becoming completely hooked on Plants vs Zombies 2, another tower defense game I've not yet played till now because it's mobile-based and I don't play games on mobile devices (I finally found out that you can easily emulate the android OS within Windows!)  The only problem is, while PvZ2 is far more entertaining than GTD ever was, it requires full, complete attention to play it, while a huge part of what I love about GTD is that it requires so little attention due to the long down times waiting for levels for finish playing out. . .

WGW - 2020-01-19, 06:12 PM

wandering shost - 2020-01-17, 12:14 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-16, 09:13 AM

eze - 2020-01-14, 06:25 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-10, 05:00 PM

Alby - 2020-01-10, 12:45 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-08, 08:00 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-08, 07:54 AM

WGW - 2020-01-07, 06:20 AM

So many typos, due to sleep deprivation, and a dying keyboard battery. . . so I'm reposting the last comment! :)

@Rupert the Great: I share your fstration on how Black Opals work in this game!  I tried the same thing you described, early on in my learning how to play this game, which is to say, having all three gems to create a Black Opal placed ON the maze, but not actually combining them until many turns later, because I knew already that Black Opals only boost gems already placed.  But as you saw, the Black Opal bug is even worse than that, because only the gems already placed as of the turn when you put down the last of the three gems needed to make the Black Opal will get boosted, no matter how many more turns you wait to actually do the "Combine Special".  It honestly baffles me how the game's code could have been written to create such oddball behavior.  In most of the games I play which get to level 196, I end up building at least two, very often three, and sometimes even more Black Opals.  But mostly this is for the purpose of reducing the overall TIME it takes to get to the "end" (level 196 for me), it's not really necessary to build more than one (and sometimes not even one) if you just want to GET to level 196.

@Mooper: I've been using the same basic maze layout for so many years now, it's not at all an issue for me to remember it.  But if you're having trouble remembering your maze layout. . . I'd suggest taking a screenshot! :)

WGW - 2020-01-07, 06:17 AM

@Rupert the Great: I share your fstration on how Black Opals work in this game!  I tried the same thing you described, early on in my learning how to play it, which is to a having all three gems to create a Black Opal placed on the maze, but not actually combining them until many turns later because I knew already that Black Opals only boost gems already placed.  But as you saw, the Black Opal bu is even worse than that, because only the gems already placed get boosted as of the turn when you put down the last of the three gems needed to make the Black Opal, no matter how many more turns you wait to actually do a "Combine Special".  It honestly baffles me how the game's code could have been written to create such oddball behavior.  In most of the games I play which get to level 196, I end up building at least two, ery often three, and sometimes even more Black Opals.  But mostly this is for the purpose of reducing the overall TIME it takes to get to the "end" (level 196 for me), it's not really necessary to build more than one (and sometimes not even one) if you just want to GET to level 196.

@Mooper: I;ve been using the same basic maze layout for so many years now, it's not at all an issue for me to remember it.  But if you're having trouble remembering your maze layout. . . I'd suggest taking a screenshot! :)

a - 2020-01-06, 10:19 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-05, 09:53 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-05, 09:50 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-05, 08:28 AM

a - 2020-01-04, 07:45 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-04, 05:43 PM

Mooper - 2020-01-04, 10:11 AM

Mooper - 2020-01-04, 06:38 AM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-03, 04:17 PM

Rupert The Great - 2020-01-03, 04:16 PM

a - 2020-01-02, 10:23 PM

WGW - 2019-12-31, 09:19 PM

WGW - 2019-12-31, 09:06 PM

@Rupert The Great: Bummer you didn't have better luck (which is all it comes down to, really, when you have a emerald run maze layout as good as you described).  You got further than I ever did in an emerald run-- the best emerald run I ever had I lost at level 184-- with a great opal and a great amthyst right in the middle of the maze, and at least 24 dark emeralds.  That was. . . frustrating.  :)

If you continue to make attempts, I'd love to see a screenshot of any good emerald run.  In most of my attempts at doing emerald runs I've tried to *bunch up* dark emeralds in clusters, to increase the odds of a total stun lock.  But you had a better result spreading out the dark emeralds.  Which is better (spreading out or bunching up dark emeralds, and how many jades you build) feels like the kind of thing that you can't calculate/figure out in advance, but can only determine by doing lots of emerald runs and seeing what works out best.

Thanks for the further info-- and happy new year! :)

Rupert The Great - 2019-12-30, 09:39 AM

Rupert The Great - 2019-12-30, 09:35 AM