Do you want Shards to be allowed?

[Vangelios]

I think it's not the right way to prohibit shards in BL
I can imagine already doing it all using disquake and immo, grabow or decks without pillars to escape of disquake,

I think the most fair is prohibitions, for example each player can banish 3 cards and both players go to duel with the 6 banned card, so there not will be a mirror on deck in 50% of duels. is a good way to continue with all cards and prevent metas-games, this system was also well accepted in trials. if 6 bans are not enough may increase to 8 or 10 .

[rob77dp]

I think it's not the right way to prohibit shards in BL
I can imagine already doing it all using disquake and immo, grabow or decks without pillars to escape of disquake,

I think the most fair is prohibitions, for example each player can banish 3 cards and both players go to duel with the 6 banned card, so there not will be a mirror on deck in 50% of duels. is a good way to continue with all cards and prevent metas-games, this system was also well accepted in trials. if 6 bans are not enough may increase to 8 or 10 .

I would expect league banning like you're suggesting (Vang) resulting in a "reverse meta".  Allowing (and hence almost requiring) bans for each player will result in very similar bans being presented every match.  The strongest X cards would be most commonly banned in most cases/matches.  This results in the meta moving from likely seeing the strongest certain cards to never seeing the strongest certain cards (which receive the most frequent bans).

[Naesala]

2. I can't tell you if I like shards in PvP events, cause it really depends on the PvP event type.
3. Shards in tourneys are cool- sometimes. It wouldn't be fun if we can play Shards every time in weekly tournaments. (I know it wouldn't be like that...) But one tourney out of 15 with shards is okay. When people ask for more, then rather no than yes.
4. In Trials it was fun, but I would like to see shards only in the final match and just with restrictions.

Higurashi defined all of these as "yes" votes. If you vote no, then you are ignoring the intent of the poll.

Yeah, I think the data for this poll is (almost) useless. Misunderstanding before voting is sure to have netted tons of inaccurate votes, and people going "I don't want it 99% of the time, but the definition of yes means I should choose yes" is messing with the results too.

As someone who doesn't PvP often, I will say that shards are an enormous reason why I don't even try. I don't want to play in an event with shards most the time. A few with restrictions might be alright. CL should be fine because it is for more seasoned players who probably have the shards, and Trials with restrictions make sense as it determines the master of the element.

That said I think everyone can agree the mere existence of this thread proves that the shards are overpowered and need nerfed again. Hopefully Zanz notices.

[Higurashi]

Dunno how many times I have to say this, really. It's not messing with the results since these are the results I want. Why else would I set up a poll like this?

As for misunderstandings, no. It's a very small number, which I can see by the discussion in this thread. If we had more people who aren't involved in competitive PvP voting here, the results would be very much off. However, we don't.

[Naesala]

29 people discussing out of 72 voters?

If you're sure. I still think there might be quite a bit of room for error, but if you're sure these are the results you are wanting, I suppose i can't say anything else about it.

[TribalTrouble]

Interesting. I don't understand why people don't want to try it on war at the least.

[eaglgenes101]

Interesting. I don't understand why people don't want to try it on war at the least.

The real confusion is why people say that there can't be good PvP events with shards. At least IMHO.

[Essence]

That said I think everyone can agree the mere existence of this thread proves that the shards are overpowered and need nerfed again. Hopefully Zanz notices.

Not at all. The problem with shards isn't (necessarily) their power level -- it's how they're obtained.  People don't feel like they should be penalized because they haven't spent years grinding Bronze to build up their collection of 26 (?) rare cards -- but the weapons and other rares are easily obtained by fighting decks that have those cards in them, so you get those almost by accident while trying for your Shards. That sucks. It's great for the skinner box, but it makes for hurt feelings in PvP.

[rob77dp]

That said I think everyone can agree the mere existence of this thread proves that the shards are overpowered and need nerfed again. Hopefully Zanz notices.

Not at all. The problem with shards isn't (necessarily) their power level -- it's how they're obtained.  People don't feel like they should be penalized because they haven't spent years grinding Bronze to build up their collection of 26 (?) rare cards -- but the weapons and other rares are easily obtained by fighting decks that have those cards in them, so you get those almost by accident while trying for your Shards. That sucks. It's great for the skinner box, but it makes for hurt feelings in PvP.

What really is confusing to me is voting no shards in any PvP event at all.  Again, "yes" here does not mean all PvP unrestricted 100% allowing shards.  If some events allow them, some restrict, and many others still choose to ban them in many cases and a player doesn't like using them or whatever distaste they have for shards then they do not have to enter the events that allow them.

Right?

(I quote your statements Essence as they triggered my thoughts, above, not that I'm aiming it all at you...)

[dragtom]

their collection of 26 (?) rare cards

27 rares:
(shard+weapon)*12 + pharao+miracle+squid

I have no clue as to why shards are not allowed, but nymphs (and marks) are. Sure, you don't need to grind for them,
but for the common player they are harder to get.

If the time spent grinding is a limiting factor, I also see no reason to ban them in upped enviroment.

[Naesala]

As Dragtom explained, if rarity is what is pushing people to not want shards, then so to should be complaints of the weapons, pharoahs, squids and miracles, and even more so marks and nymphs. Rarity alone is not driving it. As I said, not having shards has made me not want to enter shard-inclusive events. Pharoah/Squid/Miracle feel like no bother at all, and the weapons are rarely necessary in 6's, and even so don't feel like as big a problem as shards. Rarity is just a further exclusion for people; I do not believe it is what is the issue itself.

[Vangelios]

Not only rarity, nymphs are exellent and are hyper rare.
 Yeah, I for one have lost the final of a tournament because I had not  5 or 6 copies of a nymph specifies, they are not essential, but promote much advantage, I think it is because they provide benefits for veteran players and veteran players have influence on the forum. actually nymphs are more unfair than shards, the issue of hyper rarity.

 In case of war are few players on the team that have various nymphs, then it is difficult to see abuse, but we can see what can happen when we see the team air in this war.

 Marks not have a absurd advantage, but a little advantage.

 However I'm not trying to banish nymphs pvps forum, actually I am in favor of using more shards and nymphs here, though I have disadvantages with nymphs.
 Maybe interesting do a voting for nymphs, but put the option "use but with limitation"  would be fair.