Elements PvP Tournament - Suggestions and Feedback

[dragonsdemesne]

Re: Jan 4 tourney

I thought this was a fun and enjoyable tourney, but there were two things I'd like to point out that I think could have been improved upon in design.

1) Trident.  Trident was not banned, but earthquake was.  Given that only quantum pillars were allowed, this meant that trident was very powerful, and I used it in every deck I made except for one I speedbuilt in the semis.

2) The name of the tourney.  The tournament was designed to be 'speedbow', but, at least in my experience in the tourney, stalls were the dominant archetype.  The reasons were because A) nova/immolation were banned, B) quantum pillar was the only legal quanta source and C) You had to run at least a quartet.  The combination of these factors meant that any rush was too slow to compete, due to quanta acceleration being banned and the unreliableness of quantum pillars.

[ARTHANASIOS]

I would like to mention how overpowered Fractal was in the last Weekly Tournament (especially Scarabtal). Without any Mass CC or Shields to defend against critters, quantity of creatures was better than quality. Furthermore, Scarabs are dirty cheap and, in high numbers, their health protect them from virtually any CC, let alone their :Devour ability allows them to mass CC the whole opponent field in just 1-2 turns. Mitosis was okay, because the mother creature can be easily CCed, but Fractal instantly makes many copies of a creature, making it far too strong. Obviously, at the very end, all serious matches were Scarabtal Vs Scarabtal (or PhaseSpidertal). Just my 2 .

[Jen-i]

Hey Artha,

While I didn`t play in the tourney I did prepare decks for it - planning on being there. And yes Fractal-Scarabs was an obvious deck choice. There were however two options to counter it. Either play a faster creatureless deck - Bolts and weapons, or play a Darkness duo and run Nightmare. Both options were viable in this tourney, either people misread the meta or RNG smashed those who had those decks before they got a chance to use them.

To our T.O.`s - Even though I didn't get to play, thanks for presenting another interesting deck building challenge - I at least got to enjoy that much of it!

[ARTHANASIOS]

^The CC-only decks weren't fast enough to beat up a Scarabtal; on the other hand, PhaseSpidertal was capable of outrushing Scarabtal, mostly because of being mono against a duo-trio. Nightmare would be a nice trick though, but I doubt it could delay a Scarabtal deck enough in order to win via deckout...

[treebeard xiii]

I have to agree with arthanasios scarabtal was very strong in last week's tourney it got me through to semis interesting deck building restrictions but due to the restrictions one or two decks were overly dominant the only cc deck i found the could potentially pin down scarabtal was shockwave freeze decks and only if you got enough cc out before the fractal.

[rob77dp]

Hopefully this doesn't come across too much as me just ranting and raving, but rather as the genuine feedback that it is.

Players having questions about the tournament, ban list, or similar inquiries should PM tournament organizers (all of them - three right now I think...) with it.  It is frustrating when chat (or even forum post BEFORE the tournament) has questions asked in the open by a player since the response can have non-intended competition effects.  This could include, but is not limited to, a player in the chat/forum getting an idea they otherwise would not have had if the TO response is "allowed" or a player's decks/ideas being trashed due if the TO response is "ban"/not allowed.

Legitimate gripes of unfair rules or an incomplete ban list are totally fine - just do it to the TO's.  If it ends up banned, the TO can quote the PM question and give the TO answer in that tournament's topic thread.  If players want to run around flapping their lips about their tactics or throwing out ideas they have (real or mis-leading, intentional or un-intentional) that is fine.  My problem is when it is directed at TO's publicly and requires a ban, not banned, or similar discussion.

Isn't the idea of the weekly tournaments to test deck building, PvP skill, and some luck (bracket draw, RNG, etc) of Elements players individually?  Maybe I just don't have the right concept of the weekly tournaments...

In conclusion, thank you for your time reading and considering my thoughts.

--Rob

[n00b]

Spoiler for Hidden:

Hopefully this doesn't come across too much as me just ranting and raving, but rather as the genuine feedback that it is.

Players having questions about the tournament, ban list, or similar inquiries should PM tournament organizers (all of them - three right now I think...) with it.  It is frustrating when chat (or even forum post BEFORE the tournament) has questions asked in the open by a player since the response can have non-intended competition effects.  This could include, but is not limited to, a player in the chat/forum getting an idea they otherwise would not have had if the TO response is "allowed" or a player's decks/ideas being trashed due if the TO response is "ban"/not allowed.

Legitimate gripes of unfair rules or an incomplete ban list are totally fine - just do it to the TO's.  If it ends up banned, the TO can quote the PM question and give the TO answer in that tournament's topic thread.  If players want to run around flapping their lips about their tactics or throwing out ideas they have (real or mis-leading, intentional or un-intentional) that is fine.  My problem is when it is directed at TO's publicly and requires a ban, not banned, or similar discussion.

Isn't the idea of the weekly tournaments to test deck building, PvP skill, and some luck (bracket draw, RNG, etc) of Elements players individually?  Maybe I just don't have the right concept of the weekly tournaments...

In conclusion, thank you for your time reading and considering my thoughts.

--Rob

I agree. This would make the tourney threads less crowded, as well as making sure us TOs see your question (and then it would be put into the FAQ post as usual). I will talk this over with Viney and dd, and, who knows... maybe there will be a policy change in the next week or two.

[dragonsdemesne]

If someone is asking for a rules clarification, I think that can be placed into the tournament thread, but if it's something involving strategy, I would PM it.

Examples for unclear rules to be asked in thread:
-can I use any deck mark, or just for the 6 (or whatever) allowed elements?
-are upgrades allowed or not?  TO forgot to post

Examples for strategy that I would PM:
-are you sure that you should allow nymph's tears?  that would let people bypass the ban on all creature cards
-trident sure looks OP this week, maybe you should ban it?  (I PMed exactly this two tourneys ago, jan. 4, before the tourney, but either it didn't get to the TO in time or he disagreed)  If I'd posted something like that, it might've affected people's strategies, assuming they hadn't considered trident's impact on the meta.

Posting decks isn't allowed, but sometimes if I need to use an example to ask if a particular type of deck is legal, I will post an example deck that is totally useless/unplayable just so that people can see if I'm on the right track or not in understanding the rules, i.e. something like is 6x flooding 6x cloak 18x life pendulum legal in this format.  I haven't been called out on that yet, so hopefully it's okay :p

[rob77dp]

Spoiler for nailed it:

If someone is asking for a rules clarification, I think that can be placed into the tournament thread, but if it's something involving strategy, I would PM it.

Examples for unclear rules to be asked in thread:
-can I use any deck mark, or just for the 6 (or whatever) allowed elements?
-are upgrades allowed or not?  TO forgot to post

Examples for strategy that I would PM:
-are you sure that you should allow nymph's tears?  that would let people bypass the ban on all creature cards
-trident sure looks OP this week, maybe you should ban it?  (I PMed exactly this two tourneys ago, jan. 4, before the tourney, but either it didn't get to the TO in time or he disagreed)  If I'd posted something like that, it might've affected people's strategies, assuming they hadn't considered trident's impact on the meta.

Posting decks isn't allowed, but sometimes if I need to use an example to ask if a particular type of deck is legal, I will post an example deck that is totally useless/unplayable just so that people can see if I'm on the right track or not in understanding the rules, i.e. something like is 6x flooding 6x cloak 18x life pendulum legal in this format.  I haven't been called out on that yet, so hopefully it's okay :p

You nailed my sentiment, dragonsdemesne, and stated it much more eloquently than I.  I wasn't trying to say that ALL tourney questions have to be PM'd, but the strategy implication questions can ruin it for some people (or un-surprise a sneaky tactic)...

[Dm]

Rules should be the same for masters and new players.

By this logic this tournament should never have started as seen in

In rules was that we have 30 minuts for building decks,but we had 58 minutes.

Further on;

If someone need more than 5 minutes,this can only be because:
-he didnt prepared decks (in 58 minutes in this case)
-he prepares counter-deck to win more easily.

Each possibility is not honorable thing and isnt by the rules.

I don't see how preparing a counter deck is not honorable. Further on, internet fails coupled with inreal make it so that five minutes are sometimes not enough (Oh how much this has happened with me.) Further on, I (and anyone, really) could build a counter deck in under five minutes. It's still speedbuilding, although in between matches. Further on, the rules never stated that you can't counter someone.

I know that most of us playing this mostly for fun,but GREED from some players can ruin tournaments and Etg also.

I fail to see the greed of Deuce in your post.

Also im dissapointed with TO ,,jippy99,, response that he is only substitute fot TO,and that he cant do anything.
This problem again?

If game and events continue with conditions like this i will consider to stop playing Elements.

It was only two minutes. If I Recall Correctly, we extend that time usually, specially for matches further into the tournament since disqualifying someone for simply two more minutes is pretty senseless. Not only that, but again, in real kicks in the way and sometimes we just can't come back in five minutes.

And you ,,MASTERS,, just keep helping eachother,this will prevent more people to playing this game.

Conspiracy much?

Anyway 20 of you can play eachother and that is enough players.

I fail to see how this is related to this whole incident.

Edit: Somehow quote marks turned into deck marks.

[rogerluc]

i agree with danieela, we must play with the same rules, and must be gentlemen , if this is not the case all people leave element.

[Marsu]

If you don't like it, leave. Elements was fine before and it will be still fine wether you're here or not, sorry. This game will never be left by a relevant amount of players as long as it stays this good.

More on topic, I do have to agree with Danieela a bit. Not with the solemn part, but with the core: If the rules say 5 minutes (and emphasize the importance of that rule), it should be 5 minutes, and especially someone in deuce's position should demand high standards of himself. It would be nice to hear a word from him here.