Elements PvP League - Suggestions and Feedback

[plastiqe]

This rule...

In addition, players who join are expected to complete at least 30 matches before the end of the league season.  Players who fail to reach this number will be banned from the next league season.

Should be changed to..

In addition, players who join are expected to complete at least 30 matches before the end of the league season.  Players who fail to reach this number will not be eligible for rewards.

[Vangelios]

This rule...

In addition, players who join are expected to complete at least 30 matches before the end of the league season.  Players who fail to reach this number will be banned from the next league season.

Should be changed to..

In addition, players who join are expected to complete at least 30 matches before the end of the league season.  Players who fail to reach this number will not be eligible for rewards.

3 months is not enough to play 30 matches?
I was the last to enter the BL preceding the last day, and I got my 30 matches five days before the end.

[Onizuka]

Disagree. Means anyone who isn't top 6 eligible basically has no obligation whatsoever. By joining the event you are agreeing to complete it, in this case 30 games. While there can be unforeseen circumstances, there are three months to finish all your games assuming you joined the first day (and anyone joining later is voluntarily handicapping themselves in regards to time). One game every day would get you the games.

[Speculation] Once you become low enough in the ranking, with this rule change there is no reason for you to continue playing. This decreases the amount of games played. [/speculation]

Removing the obligation to the event from the entire league except for 6 people for each is just stupid.

[pikachufan2164]

Oni speaks the truth here.

If we removed the penalties for not completing 30 matches, then some people will just refuse to play the moment they realize that they're not in the running for prizes. We're already having a tough time getting people to play as is; there's no need to make things more difficult for ourselves.

[dragonsdemesne]

I was fairly happy with the state of league this season, although as always, I really wish there had been more players.  Near the end of the season it was very hard for me to find matches, because either people had given up or because I'd already played 10 games with them.  I didn't run into that problem in the previous season, and I never made 10 matches with anyone then.  I think more people gave up early this season when they figured they no longer had a chance at the prizees.

The one thing I would have really liked would've been more updates in the league standings.  Last season, they were updated every week or two or three, which was nice.  This season I think we got 2 updates before the final standings.

[Jenkar]

I'm really sorry about that last point :< There should be more updates next season.

We would like feedback on the modification of the 24h rule to the 20h rule, and on the alllowing of bans. :3

[Calindu]

We would like feedback on the modification of the 24h rule to the 20h rule, and on the alllowing of bans. :3

Really liked the 20h rule, better than the 24h for sure.
Also allowing of bans was pretty silly, we already had shard bans between us w/o this anyway.
One rule I would like: You need to play 20 matches to not be banned and 30 to have a chance at prizes.

[Vangelios]

I also think the 20h rule, better than the 24h
"play 20 matches to not be banned and 30 to have a chance at prizes." good suggestion Calinidu.
I also would like a bonus of +100 elo points for players who reach 30matches, would separate the most interested in the league of the players dropouts.

[pikachufan2164]

I also would like a bonus of +100 elo points for players who reach 30matches, would separate the most interested in the league of the players dropouts.

The 30 match minimum for prize eligibility already takes care of that. There's no need to apply modifiers.

Also allowing of bans was pretty silly, we already had shard bans between us w/o this anyway.

True, but there is a need to make it official so that people (players new to Leagues, in particular) don't think that it's against the rules to have mutually agreed-upon bans.

[AnnaMall]

The 20hour moddification suited me fine cause you can play the same opponent the same time every day, which was great for people like me coming online at specific times

The refl shields ban was really annoying, but I cannot see what can be done about it.

The bans kinda strirred the meta a lot and I ended up having two seperate sets of decks(shrads/shardless), which was not of my taste. On the other hand it allowed for some very interesting deckbuilding challenges (random ideas from chat members, weird card bans), which I felt good about. Overall I believe there should be a standard match type which will define the league's meta.

[Vangelios]

I also would like a bonus of +100 elo points for players who reach 30matches, would separate the most interested in the league of the players dropouts.

The 30 match minimum for prize eligibility already takes care of that. There's no need to apply modifiers.

I think we have many players vain, only because they have some strong scoring want to stay on top even knowing they will be disqualified, and the top 6 not is enough to encourage matches.
if ya wanna encourage more matches, will have to think of something else more that top 6, otherwise leave anyway.

[rob77dp]

Spoiler for Jenkar's 'question' I am addressing:

[snip]
We would like feedback on [snip] the alllowing of bans.

Without naming names, in BL I eventually gave up on even requesting bans.  Only request I really felt would be fun / make the environment 'better' was shard'less matches (SoFo abuse drives me crazy).  The wording of the rule left very few instances where any additional bans were agreed upon.  Since most of the players online at times I could duel did not want shard'less then to avoid what AnnaMall stated about carrying TWO sets of deck codes (shard'ed and shard'less) I simply quit requesting additional bans.  Blech.

My feedback condensed:  without modifying the wording, my opinion is the additional ban rule will be seldom used if a few players decide they simply don't want to consider ever banning anything extra.