Elements PvP Tournament - Suggestions and Feedback

[blueberrymania]

Then why weren't nymphs allowed?

[n00b]

Then why weren't nymphs allowed?

Nymphs are not airborne.

[Vangelios]

This last tournament wasn't exactly fair, as Trident was allowed, but earthquake wasn't, and regular nymphs weren't allowed, but Nymph's Tears was.

Not banning NT might've been an oversight on our part, but Trident was intentional. It has never been one of those overly-used cards and we did not expect much of a problem from it in the tournament. Also, unless I'm mistaken, neither of those two cards played a major role in deciding the winner. (This is referring to the Sept 15 2012 tourney for all future readers)

Cheesy  used trident and tnymph tears to get to the end, I used it and won, and also lost to this deck, however as I say, it was fair, the rules were the same for all, and .nymph tears is a common card. Now if the intention was to make a flying tournament, of course failed, even with numerous prohibitions.

[furballdn]

My opinions on the tourney even though I did not participate because furballs never do

Nymphs should be banned. They are not airborne.
Nymphs tears should be banned. Not banning it is a loophole just being asked to be abused. Nymphs tears is basically the same as summoning a nymph, only being a spell and costing an extra pillar.

Earthquake and trident are very different. EQ gets out early and is crippling. Trident requires duo quanta, at least 3 and 3 , and a one turn delay. There is a reason that trident is often considered one of the worst elemental weapons. EQ is only very useful early game. Its usefulness decreases almost exponentially as the game drags on. Trident allows repeatable EQ, but at a very pricey and slow pace.

[Hawfrey1337]

Not banning NT might've been an oversight on our part, but Trident was intentional. It has never been one of those overly-used cards and we did not expect much of a problem from it in the tournament. Also, unless I'm mistaken, neither of those two cards played a major role in deciding the winner. (This is referring to the Sept 15 2012 tourney for all future readers)

My opponent built his deck entirely around Nymph Tears, it did played a major role in deciding the winner in our match '-'
(Just pointing that out )

[RootRanger]

This last tournament wasn't exactly fair, as Trident was allowed, but earthquake wasn't, and regular nymphs weren't allowed, but Nymph's Tears was.

If Trident and NT are OP in a tournament's meta, you can just use them. That's how you win tournaments, buddy. You find what's OP in the tourney's meta, and you use it.
What would be unfair is if the OP cards were not available to all of the players. In the last tournament, this was not the case.

[deuce22]

this discussion is kind of ridiculous since both NT and trident had hard counters. There was no single dominant deck in this tourney, so there should be no complaints.

[Vangelios]

This last tournament wasn't exactly fair, as Trident was allowed, but earthquake wasn't, and regular nymphs weren't allowed, but Nymph's Tears was.

If Trident and NT are OP in a tournament's meta, you can just use them. That's how you win tournaments, buddy. You find what's OP in the tourney's meta, and you use it.
What would be unfair is if the OP cards were not available to all of the players. In the last tournament, this was not the case.

Is true, and yet I posted this option in the tournament topic!
maybe he meant, which was a controversial rule, if that's, he all has reason.
but was fair, of course.

[Jen-i]

I've been thinking this for a while, but haven't yet said anything.

While I think our T.O.'s do a fantastic job in general, and put up with lots of complaints with great patience, I think there is one area in which they could improve.

Simply keeping the tournament moving on schedule would make a big difference, as it stands many of the delays and problems in my experience come because a T.O. is trying to be fair to the players in an earlier bracket and have allowed them to keep playing as opposed to having declared a winner by coin flip earlier. In my experience with paper CCG tournament play each game was given a fixed length of time to occur (usually 45 minutes) and then there was a brief break (usually 15 minutes) before the next round began. While this schedule is too generous for our tourney environment, sticking to perhaps a 25 minute round (with 5 minutes between duels) could do wonders for keeping us on schedule. And while that might be too tight it at least provides us with a starting place.

P.S. It is not said enough, "Thank you to our T.O.'s for your hard work, your patience and your sleep deprivation - it is appreciated!"

[n00b]

Viney and I are working on making some more set-in-stone guidelines regarding tournaments, the round lengths, and disconnectivity which should be up before this next tournament, hopefully in the next day or two.

As to the other part: thank you. Viney and I are still semi-new to this whole thing, so we're not getting things going as flawlessly as we hopefully will be able to in the future. Vineroz and I both thank all of the competitors for remaining patient with us. Honestly, I feel we have done a decent job thus far, but I know there are many improvements to be made.

[RootRanger]

Giving the win to the player that deserves it is the priority, in my opinion. Matches shouldn't be cut short to 25 minutes; that's not enough time for best of 3. The real fix would be teaching people to play out against the AI when a desync occurs instead of replaying it. In the most likely case that exactly one player can beat the AI, that player is given the win. This method is both fairer and usually less time consuming.

[furballdn]

I hope I don't sound too whiny. The first actual tournament at a good time for me was canceled because we lacked 1-2 people. Couldn't RNG have decided byes or something?