Sir Valimont

[Acsabi44]

A good sportsman here. I value that more than any other characteristic or skill related to War.

[Rastafla]

I have always wanted the system from the first war. The masters right out asks and picks people who they want. This a is a forum event for those who find it nice to play for each other and there are no ingame benefits for those playing.

Auction is simply a way to break this and make it into a contest about winning and gives the option to a master messing up other masters teams just to allow new players in, the majortiy of which wont get in anyway and end up in underworld.

To me 1 or 2 players predetermined to a few teams is nothing (as is the current situation) or the whole team already predetermined as in the first war is also nothing. All it shows is that masters want some part of the old system back where you play with your friends or those you have an understanding with instead of having to deal with the potential drama and people you don't know and the loss of  vault cards.

For in all fairness each player is a liability in war each one is a potential loss and loss of cards and getting all players cheap is far more important as then you can have more fun and do more funny decks and PLAY longer.

tl;dr All this boils down to two point of views. Having fun or winning.

If the focus is winning, to hell with war. To some people fun and winning is the same and then you will have 1 winner and 11 losers which will make the sadness outweigh the happiness.

If the focus is fun, then I want to do war again for anyone. You will have 1 winner and 11 participants one with happiness and eleven with contentment of having done something fun.

Edit some obvious spelling errors.

[icecoldbro]

I have always wanted the system from the first war. The masters right out asks and picks people who they want. This a is a forum event for those who find it nice to play for each other and there are no ingame benefits for those playing.

Auction is simply a way to break this and make it into a contest about winning and gives the option to a master messing up other masters teams just to allow new players in, the majortiy of which wont get in anyway and end up in underworld.

To me 1 or 2 players predetermined to a few teams is nothing (as is the current situation) or the whole team already predetermined as in the first war is also nothing. All it shows is that masters want some part of the old system back where you play with your friends or those you have an understanding with instead of having to deal with the potential drama and people you don't know and the loss of  vault cards.

For in all fairness each player is a liability in war each one is a potential loss and loss of cards and getting all players cheap is far more important as then you can have more fun and do more funny decks and PLAY longer.

tl;dr All this boils down to two point of views. Having fun or winning.

If the focus is winning, to hell with war. To some people fun and winning is the same and then you will have 1 winner and 11 losers which will make the sadness outweigh the happiness.

If the focus is fun, then I want to do war again for anyone. You will have 1 winner and 11 participants one with happiness and eleven with contentment of having done something fun.

Edit some obvious spelling errors.

I agree with Rasta on this, I liked old system a lot more than the current one, It was way more fun and less of a job, I recommend at least making it 1 lieutenant that is auto picked, and 1 other player, that way it can become more between friends and people you know than a system where every other Gen. Is out to screw up your picks and make you overpay.

[Sir Valimont]

I have always wanted the system from the first war. The masters right out asks and picks people who they want. This a is a forum event for those who find it nice to play for each other and there are no ingame benefits for those playing.

Auction is simply a way to break this and make it into a contest about winning and gives the option to a master messing up other masters teams just to allow new players in, the majortiy of which wont get in anyway and end up in underworld.

To me 1 or 2 players predetermined to a few teams is nothing (as is the current situation) or the whole team already predetermined as in the first war is also nothing. All it shows is that masters want some part of the old system back where you play with your friends or those you have an understanding with instead of having to deal with the potential drama and people you don't know and the loss of vault cards.

For in all fairness each player is a liability in war each one is a potential loss and loss of cards and getting all players cheap is far more important as then you can have more fun and do more funny decks and PLAY longer.

tl;dr All this boils down to two point of views. Having fun or winning.

If the focus is winning, to hell with war. To some people fun and winning is the same and then you will have 1 winner and 11 losers which will make the sadness outweigh the happiness.

If the focus is fun, then I want to do war again for anyone. You will have 1 winner and 11 participants one with happiness and eleven with contentment of having done something fun.

Edit some obvious spelling errors.

First of all, whatever your view on how teams should be formed, the important thing is that all players, including younger and inexperienced ones, are treated fairly.

Second of all, if you actually think that "each player is a liability in war" then your war strategy is not very good. There are some players who are a net positive. Figuring out who those are is, obviously, the important thing to do. A single decision can make a 60-card difference in late rounds; finding people who know how to make those decisions is the key to winning. Not finding a way to lose as infrequently as possible.

This event is a war of attrition, yes, but only by overall summation of card penalties. There still is a standard single-win-single-loss outcome of each battle. So the strategy does not change from a situation where penalties and awards would be balanced.

[TheIdioticIdiot]

now that I think about it, can't the warmaster (that's you, dd) forbid this and monitor it?

[Rastafla]

I have always wanted the system from the first war. The masters right out asks and picks people who they want. This a is a forum event for those who find it nice to play for each other and there are no ingame benefits for those playing.

Auction is simply a way to break this and make it into a contest about winning and gives the option to a master messing up other masters teams just to allow new players in, the majortiy of which wont get in anyway and end up in underworld.

To me 1 or 2 players predetermined to a few teams is nothing (as is the current situation) or the whole team already predetermined as in the first war is also nothing. All it shows is that masters want some part of the old system back where you play with your friends or those you have an understanding with instead of having to deal with the potential drama and people you don't know and the loss of vault cards.

For in all fairness each player is a liability in war each one is a potential loss and loss of cards and getting all players cheap is far more important as then you can have more fun and do more funny decks and PLAY longer.

tl;dr All this boils down to two point of views. Having fun or winning.

If the focus is winning, to hell with war. To some people fun and winning is the same and then you will have 1 winner and 11 losers which will make the sadness outweigh the happiness.

If the focus is fun, then I want to do war again for anyone. You will have 1 winner and 11 participants one with happiness and eleven with contentment of having done something fun.

Edit some obvious spelling errors.

First of all, whatever your view on how teams should be formed, the important thing is that all players, including younger and inexperienced ones, are treated fairly.

Second of all, if you actually think that "each player is a liability in war" then your war strategy is not very good. There are some players who are a net positive. Figuring out who those are is, obviously, the important thing to do. A single decision can make a 60-card difference in late rounds; finding people who know how to make those decisions is the key to winning. Not finding a way to lose as infrequently as possible.

This event is a war of attrition, yes, but only by overall summation of card penalties. There still is a standard single-win-single-loss outcome of each battle. So the strategy does not change from a situation where penalties and awards would be balanced.

Second of all, if you actually think that "each player is a liability in war" then your war strategy is not very good.

Every player means a potential loss, half of all games are losses, and the less potential losses you have the better. If a general is alone with say 400 card vault he would do FAR better than with 10 teammates though this situation wont happen due to rules. As the war goes on its better to have less players. I'm thinking primarily war 1, war 2 was so skewered due to entropys vault dominance.

[willng3]

now that I think about it, can't the warmaster (that's you, dd) forbid this and monitor it?

Forbid it?  Sure.  Monitor?  Since PMs exist, I don't think that will solve much.

[ddevans96]

now that I think about it, can't the warmaster (that's you, dd) forbid this and monitor it?

No, because almost all of these would be done through PM which I do not have access to.

[Sir Valimont]

Every player means a potential loss, half of all games are losses, and the less potential losses you have the better. If a general is alone with say 400 card vault he would do FAR better than with 10 teammates though this situation wont happen due to rules. As the war goes on its better to have less players. I'm thinking primarily war 1, war 2 was so skewered due to entropys vault dominance.

Ah ok I see what you mean. You are right. The result of what you're talking about is that it's harder to lose cards the fewer cards you have ... so it's easy to hurt someone early but hard to kill them off. I guess I consider that a general tenet of War which is interesting and fun, but I don't think it directly applies to the auction process.

[GG]

Gravity bids

24 cards

(What are you looking at? )

[Onizuka]

What the?

Well its gonna get there eventually, might as well speed up the process

[Sir Valimont]

What the?

Well its gonna get there eventually, might as well speed up the process

Numerical typo ftw.

Well I am flattered. I am still neutral so if any other general is interested to the tune of 24 I will certainly not stop them from bidding. I will make a fair and honest choice between contenders.