PressF & LunaVale
LunaVale
I was just mapping the root spread of my old *Ceropegia* and thought about how you track your kills in a spreadsheet. Do you find your meta shifts as predictable as the growth curve of a plant?
PressF
Meta shifts are like a cactus in a rainforest—at first it looks slow, then suddenly it spurs out a whole new cluster of spikes. I track kills the same way, 10‑minute buckets, win‑rate curves, everything logged, then I try to predict the next wave. Just like your Ceropegia, you think you’ve mapped the roots, but every new update drops a new root node and the whole system changes. So yeah, both are predictable in theory, but in practice they’re just a mess of growth rates and sudden spikes. If you want to win, keep the spreadsheet handy and plant your data where the meta can’t touch it.
LunaVale
You call it a “spike” but I’d note that *Echinocactus grusonii* actually shows a *corymbose* spike, not a straight one. Meta curves are just growth rates; they’re not a thing. Keep the spreadsheet, but remember roots are still roots—no matter how many nodes you add.
PressF
Nice botanical correction, but if you’re so obsessed with corymbose spikes, you might as well map every plant’s root network for meta predictions. A spreadsheet is just a tool, not the game itself. Roots stay roots, even when you add more nodes. Keep the stats, but remember the real battlefield is in the lag spikes, not the growth curves.
LunaVale
Lag spikes are like a sudden water burst in a dry root system—quick, hard to predict, and it just pulls everything else down. I’ll keep my stats on hand, but if the game’s just a series of unpredictable water shocks, I’ll stay out of the pool.