Rushes Vs. Stalls

[DevilLoss]

This should cover 90% of the cards; the rest shouldn't be too hard to figure out. If you approve of this idea, I can make a big list of all the rush, stall, and universal cards.

i dont think this would cover 90% because not all cretures are rushes look at artic squids, toadfish, otygh, anubis is useful in stalls because of immortality. also with knew cards like ghost of the past and nightmare that not much of a stall or rush. you would have to yes make them into big things and you could get a bit nit picky but overall 90% really couldnt be defined like this alot of cards overlap

but i do agree with the major groupings like
healing: is defintly stall because regaining lost health is essiantial to most stalls
creatures: like pheonix or garbiods/shriekers
dragons: its iffy devs dragons is a deck becaus stalls still need damage nd dragons are just tough high damage creatures
creatures like devourers parasite toadfish artic squid
pc: would be universal otherwise it would/could become unfair
cc:can go a bit both ways some rushes dont need them others do.
weapons: certian weapons can be used for rushes other's cannot a druidic staff is more a stall thing then rush while arsenic can be used for speed poison and such farenhieght is more used in stalls while morning star is just a nice damage card that cant be stolen/destroyed
anyways these things need to be worked out there will be neutral cards but those can be taken care of

[RootRanger]

i dont think this would cover 90% because not all cretures are rushes look at artic squids, toadfish, otygh, anubis

Rushes need every creature in order for it to be balanced.
Ever tried outrushing 6 purple nymphs without using any CC? It's a challenge.

[DSSCRA]

I don't really like the current definition of stall It rules out a lot of great stalls I would be in favor of the decks having to be approved by someone as a stall or a rush before the match

[DevilLoss]

i like the idea but rushes are about speed when would u use a squid to rush ? instead u would throw in something cheap like eq's in a garbiods rush to slow down ur oppenent while u just rip him to shreads
stalls are about slowing them down then doing a huge burst damage in winning two turns or decking out an oppenent

[TimerClock14]

I'm going to stay with the limits on deck size.

It's true that some stall decks are less than 44 cards, but I wouldn't want a bunch of people taking the same stall deck that was posted in the forums because it works well. I want people to make their own original stalls. Stall decks are much much more difficult to build than rush decks because the card pool requires more thought. You can't simply choose a good combo, throw in some SNovas/QTowers and a little splash and have a good deck. You have to carefully decide which cards you choose.

Many people think that rushes are far more powerful than a stall deck because it can belt out severe damage within the first few turns, but in truth, stalls are in a much higher league than rushes. Most people don't use these powerful decks, however, because the games take too long. A stall deck is most often used against HBs or FGs, but even then, it's still under 40 cards half the time.

Not to mention, if we designated which cards are stall cards and which are rush cards, then that'd discourage creative deck building and it'd make the rules far too complicated.

Simple events require simple rules.

[RootRanger]

It's true that some stall decks are less than 44 cards, but I wouldn't want a bunch of people taking the same stall deck that was posted in the forums because it works well. I want people to make their own original stalls.

If someone wants to take a random idea off the forum (bad idea actually, a lot of the decks aren't so great) then they can still just turn a 30 card deck into a 45 card deck by adding in more of each card. For example, if the 30 card deck has 12 pillars and 4 sundials, the 45 card deck will have 18 pillars and 6 sundials.

Stall decks are much much more difficult to build than rush decks because the card pool requires more thought. You can't simply choose a good combo, throw in some SNovas/QTowers and a little splash and have a good deck. You have to carefully decide which cards you choose.

I find them equally difficult to build. With both decks, a wasted card will hurt you.

Many people think that rushes are far more powerful than a stall deck because it can belt out severe damage within the first few turns, but in truth, stalls are in a much higher league than rushes. Most people don't use these powerful decks, however, because the games take too long. A stall deck is most often used against HBs or FGs, but even then, it's still under 40 cards half the time.

CCYB is a ramp domin, Rol/Hope is a ramp domin or even a ramp semi-rush because the RoLs help for fractal dragons. Shak'ars is an instant semi-rush.
Nevertheless, AI grinding decks are not a good way to see what decks are the strongest. FG decks are designed to compete against domins, mostly, which is why they are either ramps or stalls, which are defeated by instants and ramps, respectively. AI3 decks are designed to defeat the opponent as fast as you can while expecting little damage.

Not to mention, if we designated which cards are stall cards and which are rush cards, then that'd discourage creative deck building and it'd make the rules far too complicated.

Simple events require simple rules.

You can stick with your original rules, but my rules suggested actually divide the decks into rushes and stalls. The current rules do next to nothing because a rush deck can always be made larger to be called a "stall" by the current rules. The event has potential, but there is this one rule holding it back.

[TimerClock14]

Updated OP

[Scaredgirl]

I like the concept. I have a couple of comments.

Rushes Vs. Stalls kind of kills the theme because it uses gaming slang. Why not use the Rabbits vs. Tortoises like you picture there suggests?

Forcing "Rabbits" to use a 30 card deck, and "Tortoises" a 45+ card deck sounds more logical to me. With your current rules one could have 40 cards, while the other 41. They are too close to each other imo.

I agree with RootRanger. Currently the only difference between Rush and a Stall is deck size. It would probably make more sense to have some other limitations as well, like banning Rush from using Shields, and Stall from using Weapons. Unless you do something like that, the event might as well be called Big vs. Small.

I'm interested in this upped cards rule you have. Why make it so complex? Why not just a simple "6 upped cards max"?

Just my opinions, take them or leave them.

[TimerClock14]

I like the concept. I have a couple of comments.

Thanks. You've made some really good points too, some of them are a few I have overlooked in the past

Rushes Vs. Stalls kind of kills the theme because it uses gaming slang. Why not use the Rabbits vs. Tortoises like you picture there suggests?

The picture reminded me most of the event so I chose it.
I like the Rabbits vs. Tortises idea better than Stalls vs. Rushes though. It's a bit comical and will catch more peoples' eyes. I got so used to the gaming slang that I used it here without a second thought.
.....interesting.....

Forcing "Rabbits" to use a 30 card deck, and "Tortoises" a 45+ card deck sounds more logical to me. With your current rules one could have 40 cards, while the other 41. They are too close to each other imo.

I developed those rules roughly when I first came up with the event. I had to draw the line somewhere, and that's where I drew it.
I feel that 30 card rush decks are a bit limiting. So i put the max on them up a bit. But now I'm not so sure.

I agree with RootRanger. Currently the only difference between Rush and a Stall is deck size. It would probably make more sense to have some other limitations as well, like banning Rush from using Shields, and Stall from using Weapons. Unless you do something like that, the event might as well be called Big vs. Small.

You have a point here. Rather than having fast decks vs. Slow decks, i was basically making it big decks vs small decks. The card limitations were a bit complex for such a simple event. I felt that it'd make the rules overcomplicated. But if its that few limitations, then I'm all for it.
What RootRanger was originally suggesting was to have every card be labeled as a stall card or a rush card. Lowering it to only a select few cards being labeled will make it less restrictive and simpler.

I'm interested in this upped cards rule you have. Why make it so complex? Why not just a simple "6 upped cards max"?

TBH, I just pulled those rules out of thin air. I'm beginning to take a liking to them, however, as it puts more between a stall and a rush than simple deck size.
It complicates the event a bit, but it makes for better strategical planning. It sort of pushes away new players, though, since most PvP events have a 6 upped card max, and this one 12. But it's not written in stone or anything, so I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

[Scaredgirl]

I like the idea of categorizing every single card in the game to either "rush" or "stall". It would make the deckbuilding pretty interesting and even educational to those who are unfamiliar with the concepts.

Yea, I'd like to see this event happen asap. That would of course mean that someone would have to do the horrible task of dividing the cards into two piles.

[TimerClock14]

I like the idea of categorizing every single card in the game to either "rush" or "stall". It would make the deckbuilding pretty interesting and even educational to those who are unfamiliar with the concepts.

Yea, I'd like to see this event happen asap. That would of course mean that someone would have to do the horrible task of dividing the cards into two piles.

Lol, I'd love to do so, but I have no time for it. If anyone would like to do this, by all means, go ahead!

[xdude]

Rush:

Code: [Select]

4t3 4t4 4t5 4tb 4vd 4ve 4vf 4vh 4vj 4vk 4vl 4vm 4vq 500 52h 52i 52j 52k 52m 52n 52o 52q 52t 52u 52v 55l 55m 55n 55o 55q 55s 55u 560 561 562 568 58p 58q 58r 58u 58v 590 591 5bt 5bu 5bv 5c0 5c1 5c5 5c7 5c8 5c9 5cg 5f1 5f2 5f3 5f7 5fa 5fb 5fc

Code: [Select]

5fk 5i5 5i6 5ib 5ic 5id 5ie 5if 5ig 5ii 5io 5l9 5la 5lb 5le 5lf 5lh 5ll 5ls 5od 5oe 5of 5oi 5oj 5ok 5ol 5om 5op 5p0 5rh 5ri 5rm 5rn 5ro 5rq 5rr 5rs 5rt 5ru 5s4 5ul 5un 5ur 5ut 5uv 5v0 5v2 5v8 61p 61r 61s 61u 61v 620 622 62c 5f9 5uq 621 623


Stall:

Code: [Select]

4tc 4vg 4vi 4vn 4vo 4vp 52l 52p 52s 534 55p 55r 55t 55v 58s 58t 592 593 594 595 596 59c 5c2 5c3 5c4 5c6 5f4 5f5 5f6 5f8 5i7 5i8 5i9 5ia 5ih 5lc 5ld 5lg 5li 5lj 5lk 5lm 5og 5oh 5on 5oo 5rj 5rk 5rl 5rp 5um 5uo 5up 5us 5uu 5v1 61q 61t 624


Feel free to criticize and stuff. I considered Stall based on deckout, and no creatures with more than 1 attack could get in there. I understand some of the creatures there can get attack and so this is pretty flawed, but I can't think at anything else at 1 AM.

Conclusion: EtG is a rushy game.