Feedback and Suggestions

[RavingRabbid]

If we keep 1-ups in future events, they should be given to 3-0 sweeps only.

I understand the logic of why you'd earn an extra life for a lesser sweep.  It's true that if you sweep 2-0 the only thing preventing you from a possible 3-0 sweep is a lack of your opponent's lives, but if he had one more life it'd be possible for you to go 2-3.  You escaping unharmed is your reward.  And it's exponentially harder to prepare for opponents with more lives.  The difference between one and three is monumental.  Anyway, the extra life is meant to reward a player for doing something spectacular, going 3-0.

My point is that with how much fights you want, you can't lose without your opponent going illegal, and so, the 3-0 is unpreventable.

[kobisjeruk]

part of the reason that a person sweeping 2-0 or 1-0 deserves a 1up is because they did preform just like the 3-0 person but their opponent ran short.  but then it would be unfair to the people getting matched up with 2 live players only to not get the life. that extra life was an incentive to sweep some one.

my reasoning is that bonuses should not be taken lightly
and for something that give +1 life in an event that has limited amount to start with, it should be pretty hard to get

the first time i saw people getting the bonus because their opponent went missing or forfeited i thought, "well, this aint right" and throughout the event you can see how ridiculous this has been

by the way, there was no reason to bold and enlarged a shorten nickname that i specifically asked not to use to address me and you know full well i have said the same in chat and the only reason i can see that you're using it here right now Indrejue is to piss me off
please refrain yourself from doing that in the future

[Indrejue]

LOL  ok i will i just had to do it once

[Smokefree]

If we keep 1-ups in future events, they should be given to 3-0 sweeps only.

I understand the logic of why you'd earn an extra life for a lesser sweep.  It's true that if you sweep 2-0 the only thing preventing you from a possible 3-0 sweep is a lack of your opponent's lives, but if he had one more life it'd be possible for you to go 2-3.  You escaping unharmed is your reward.  And it's exponentially harder to prepare for opponents with more lives.  The difference between one and three is monumental.  Anyway, the extra life is meant to reward a player for doing something spectacular, going 3-0.

well I think you should  get "one" reward but not "two" for a sweep.  Either gain an extra life or your opponent lose's 2 additional lives.  I just dont feel we should get both IMO.

[QuantumT]

If Swiss pairings are going to be used and a reward for sweeping given, than the reward for sweeping needs to be there for all matches where you don't lose. It's not fair that being knocked down to 2 lives also negates any possibility for a sweep.

That said, I don't think the sweeping reward is really necessary. Not losing any lives is it's own reward.

[kobisjeruk]

i like smokefree suggestion, give the option to the winner, either get +1 or -2 to his opponent seems like the best strategic approach to this whole sweep reward thing

[majofa]

Well, now that the event is over.. I'll throw in my 2 .

First of all, as most people will agree, the event was long... Too long. It ran nearly 2 months.
Some factors contributed to this: WAR, 3 organizers, 60 participants.

As far as the event went. It was really fun. Trying to figure out what your opponent would play with what they had left. Although the marks didn't do to much in preventing decks. You could still play most any deck really, if you were willing to sacrifice the quanta from your MARK.

If I was running the event.. this is what I would do: (easiest way to give feedback lol)
Eliminate the +1 life and -2 lives for the sweeps.
Going 3-0 and not losing a life should be benefit enough. Two players, #1 3-0 and #2 3-1, would have only have a 1 life difference instead of 2. And losing 5 lives to a sweep is such an insanely high amount.
Other than that, nothing really should be changed.

*** Although, I still think it would be interesting that if you lost a MARK, you couldn't use any cards from that Element either. ***

[Scaredgirl]

Well, now that the event is over.. I'll throw in my 2 .

First of all, as most people will agree, the event was long... Too long. It ran nearly 2 months.
Some factors contributed to this: WAR, 3 organizers, 60 participants.

As far as the event went. It was really fun. Trying to figure out what your opponent would play with what they had left. Although the marks didn't do to much in preventing decks. You could still play most any deck really, if you were willing to sacrifice the quanta from your MARK.

If I was running the event.. this is what I would do: (easiest way to give feedback lol)
Eliminate the +1 life and -2 lives for the sweeps.
Going 3-0 and not losing a life should be benefit enough. Two players, #1 3-0 and #2 3-1, would have only have a 1 life difference instead of 2. And losing 5 lives to a sweep is such an insanely high amount.
Other than that, nothing really should be changed.

*** Although, I still think it would be interesting that if you lost a MARK, you couldn't use any cards from that Element either. ***

Thanks for the feedback.

[TheonlyrealBeef]

I'd personally like for cards from an element to be available even after you lose a mark if you lost that mark during the current round. That way, if you prepare a lot of decks (your mark lost) or counters vs decks (opponents' mark lost) half of them don't become invalid after a certain mark is lost xP

I can see the downside, but I find it hard to build trios and still keep in mind I will most likely lose marks.

[Spielkind]

im with you here, torb. its not that big problem for me, cause i marked all my decks with included cardicons, so i can easily see what deck i can use.
but i find it much smoothier to play more decks, so lost my darknessmark in first round makes 50% of my decks lost. (only an example)

its part of the game and makes it more important to choose which deck first, but i guess that disavantage in the following rounds is good enough.

[ARTHANASIOS]

I'd personally like for cards from an element to be available even after you lose a mark if you lost that mark during the current round. That way, if you prepare a lot of decks (your mark lost) or counters vs decks (opponents' mark lost) half of them don't become invalid after a certain mark is lost xP

I can see the downside, but I find it hard to build trios and still keep in mind I will most likely lose marks.

True, but the event requires more thinking and strategical choices with the current mark-losing rule. If we are allowed to use cards from the lost mark during a round, we wouldn't have to think a little further or even to speedbuild decks if things turn out really bad, would we?

[Onizuka]

It would reduce the risk of illegal decks, though