aznkid66's Arena Suggestions: Dynamic Income, Restricted HP, and Sideboard

[BluePriest]

Do you really think that would work in practice? If you face RoL/Hope with 6 deflagrations and no fire shield, then you're doomed. Since "Pure Rush" is one of the variations, I'm assuming that at least 30 of your cards would be a clean-cut pure rush deck. No quints? Air brings shockwaves or owl's eye, GG. Or maybe it's a flying weapon deck, GG. You posted counters to unoriginal, uncreative decks. To prevent getting hard-countered, people will try to break elemental norms.

Im quite confused about this paragraph....
Pure Rush isnt what I would use against an air opponent....It was there for earth for a reason...I dont see why you are metioning air... I see air, and I pack a lot of PC. No... they will resort to rainbows as they are easier to break the norm...
I wish we had more opinions besides our 2 though... Itd be nice if more joined the discussion.

[Pineapple]

The pure rush point and the first sentence asked you to give me the 60 cards that would make it so easy to counter everything.  I assumed that you will have 30 cards of a pure rush deck, leaving only 30 extra cards, and it's difficult to add on to a pure rush to counter high-CC decks like firestall, etc. so you'd have to build another 30 card stall (contradiction?) or something like that.

[BluePriest]

The pure rush point and the first sentence asked you to give me the 60 cards that would make it so easy to counter everything.  I assumed that you will have 30 cards of a pure rush deck, leaving only 30 extra cards, and it's difficult to add on to a pure rush to counter high-CC decks like firestall, etc. so you'd have to build another 30 card stall (contradiction?) or something like that.

Perhaps theres another misunderstanding. Those 30 cards that are the initial deck, are you allowed to swap those out as well? Because a speedbow can easily be optimized for the opponent you are facing if you know the element, and a key card.

[Pineapple]

You do not have a 60-card sideboard or a 30-card sideboard, but a (up to) 60-card initial deck that you can take out cards from before the match. I chose this as the best realization of my idea because it is easier to implement than a separate sideboard storage on the server.

[parasite99]

I completely disagree with that dynamic income suggestion. I am also wondering why more people voted yes than no....

Here is my point....

Are you trying to eliminate rush decks from arena?
Would you like an Arena full of oraclebows and 500hp decks?
Do you like deckout decks that pack 12 sogs 12 AM 12 Sanctuaries and some miracles?
Do you want to play 5+min games in Arena?

If your answer is "No" to the above questions, why the hell do you want people getting more electrum (and score) by using those decks.


I also voted no to all other suggestions since 2 and 3 will reduce the creativity since you will have some points stuck in one skill without having the ability to "play" with different builds.
Also the sideboard idea is terrble....what do you suggest here? People playing vs Arena having 2 decks to choose from after they see what they are facing? ;et's do that then also for FG's, Pvp and everywhere else.

Sorry for being harsh, but I think all those changes would just harm the game and make it worse. That's my opinion

[Pineapple]

1. Eliminating rush decks wouldn't be bad. The reason we don't use rush decks in PvP is not because they're insanely good, but because we're too lazy to play through more than 10 turns of a game against the same opponent. Plus, there are some speedbows, like SCEM and TADAbow, that can EM quite often. So really, this has nothing to do with making certain decks incompetent, but more eliminating bad decks.

2. What do oraclebows have to do with beating an opponent with extremely high HP? And high-hp decks are just as cool as rush decks, why are you catering towards fast decks?

3. If deck-out decks are more annoying that other types of decks, it's because they're better, not because players are lazy.

4. See 3.

--

I'm sure that this is possible, as the Arena is unsynchronized PvP. If it works for both players in PvP, why shouldn't it work for your Arena deck?
I haven't seen myself losing wins, which means that your Arena wins/losses are updated after the game, after the necessary information for this feature is known to the server. This makes the feature suggested feasible to program.

Now, are the rewards for the implementation of this feature worth the time it takes to implement it? Probably not. However, I think that it would make it better than the current "If you lose two (close or otherwise) games, you're out of the Arena forever."

--
And if you hate long games so much, then another feature could be implemented where a deck isn't active to be played against until it has finished the current battle. This would make people want to make rush decks so they get more games, but it would also allow exploits such as leaving the game open to spite the arena deck's owner.

[parasite99]

@3. If deck-out decks are more annoying that other types of decks, it's because they're better, not because players are lazy.


Got my answer...now I know what your opinion about CCGs is.
I don't like playing 5+mins games in Arena, there must be something wrong with me...and I also don't like making decks that annoy others and make them rage...It's only me I guess.
Good players make decks that don't ever win by dealing dmg to their opponent, they make 60 card decks that manage to stay alive for 1000turns without doing anything....duh? 
Good luck with it, I pass..

[BluePriest]

You do not have a 60-card sideboard or a 30-card sideboard, but a (up to) 60-card initial deck that you can take out cards from before the match. I chose this as the best realization of my idea because it is easier to implement than a separate sideboard storage on the server.

Then it will be very easy to make a customized deck to beat every opponent based on the mark... Start with the pure rush variant, and then substitute in the cards I mentioned depending on the opponents mark. I could easily come up with 30 cards that would fit those counters and substitute them in for cards when I see the specific element.

[Pineapple]

@3. If deck-out decks are more annoying that other types of decks, it's because they're better, not because players are lazy.


Got my answer...now I know what your opinion about CCGs is.
I don't like playing 5+mins games in Arena, there must be something wrong with me...and I also don't like making decks that annoy others and make them rage...It's only me I guess.
Good players make decks that don't ever win by dealing dmg to their opponent, they make 60 card decks that manage to stay alive for 1000turns without doing anything....duh? 
Good luck with it, I pass..

Deck-out decks are NOT rage-quit decks. If you don't like staying in the game long enough to win it, it's your fault. If you don't want to stay in the game because you know you can't win it, then your deck isn't good enough to beat this perfectly fair deck-out deck. If you can stay in long enough to win it, then I don't see what the problem is.
Nor do i see 1. the relation to dynamic income, which has nothing to do with game duration and 2. how the current rigid income system admonishes these type of decks and how the new system would encourage it.

You do not have a 60-card sideboard or a 30-card sideboard, but a (up to) 60-card initial deck that you can take out cards from before the match. I chose this as the best realization of my idea because it is easier to implement than a separate sideboard storage on the server.

Then it will be very easy to make a customized deck to beat every opponent based on the mark... Start with the pure rush variant, and then substitute in the cards I mentioned depending on the opponents mark. I could easily come up with 30 cards that would fit those counters and substitute them in for cards when I see the specific element.

1. You cannot build a perfect counter to a deck just by knowing its mark and 5/35 of the deck.
2. You can't modify what at its core is a rush to beat an anti-rush. How do you expect to beat firestall, etc. while also being able to beat all of the decks types you listed?

[BluePriest]

Lets take my "Da Supa Rush" for the basic build as I believe it is the fastest Sn based rush deck.

Code: [Select]

6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6qq 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u3 6u5 713 713 745 77g 77g 7ae 7ae 7dq 7gm 7ju 7n6 7qb 7qb 7qb 7qb 7qb 7tf 80g
That will be our starting point. Thats 30 cards. I have 30 more cards that I can exchange. Those 5 precognitions alone give me plenty of wiggle room. Right now it is optimized for speed. To go back to my list...

 -PC/Fire Shield
 -PC (I hate you wings)
 -Sanctuary/PA
 -Purify
 -Forget Maxwell Demon, Pure Rush is probably the way to go. Perhaps a pa if I fear quicksand, and slight pc for that annoying diamond shield
 -Sanctuary
 -Sanctuary, Shields not as important
 -PC, mass CC
 -ehhh, maybe PC? Healing is the only huge advantage light has... maybe some mass CC in case of rol/hope
 -Cheap Creature/rewind/Sanctuary in case of GotP time
 -PC. I hate permafrost shield./

A possible Sideboard would be
4x explosions
1x pulvy
1x PA
4x sanctuary
1x fire shield
2x oty
2x fire storm
3x quints
2x purify
4x black holes
6x entropy pendulums (if mark changing is allowed)

I could easily build a decent counter against most decks with that kind of variation. I could simply remove 4 precogs, and the creature of the element that would become lopsided to add in whatever I need. Then replace it with the counter that is most likely to be successful based on the opponents element.

Notice the key word is most likely. It doesnt guarantee 100% victory, but it does give me a much better chance.

[Pineapple]

Okay, decent sideboard. But still.
*extends anti-rush point and that there are plenty of good decks that aren't the "most likely" deck for that mark, which I link back to "promotes wackier non-cookie-cutter decks"*

[RootRanger]

Nor do i see 1. the relation to dynamic income, which has nothing to do with game duration and 2. how the current rigid income system admonishes these type of decks and how the new system would encourage it.

There is a clear relation between Dynamic Income and an increase in game duration, which is a negative playing experience.
Dynamic Income causes decks that have high amounts of HP remaining when they win to make more electrum. Which means Dynamic Income would encourage players to submit decks that have high amounts of HP remaining when they win. Those kinds of decks are usually healing-based stalls, and those decks take longer to play against.

1. You cannot build a perfect counter to a deck just by knowing its mark and 5/35 of the deck.
2. You can't modify what at its core is a rush to beat an anti-rush. How do you expect to beat firestall, etc. while also being able to beat all of the decks types you listed?

1.) No, but you can make a deck good enough to win a lot of the time.
2.) Well, Firestall isn't actually an anti-rush; it's an anti-domin. Rushes have the necessary speed and damage to sometimes beat a firestall, but a domin definitely wouldn't.
A rush can be modified to beat an anti-rush easily, actually. 60 cards leaves enough room for a speedbow and a 32-card firestall, which uses 2 explosions from the speedbow.