(Air tinkerer) mrpaper 3-2 Calindu (Darkness Lt) subbed Aves

[ddevans96]

A very minor difference in the tinkerer rule would have solved this: only out element pendulums count as in element.

But that'd remove so many awesome decks. Immonymphs, Zap Splash Mono Fire, Darkness's SoP Duo. IMO the current iteration made for more creative decks.

I wouldn't mind seeing a few creative decks having to be heavily modified if the return is disallowing decks like this.

[mrpaper]

I hâted the tinkerer thing from the start... Decks with no or very little cards in element kill the spirit of the évent as I could have play the exact same deck being part of team light for example. It does nothing to prove air is better then darkness, though it shows our team is creative! 

That said, I'm happy we won!!

[andretimpa]

that's the point of boosts?

We could also let every team to use any cards. Lets call it the joker boost? Of course, we would only let one player per team per round, because we don't want it to be overpowered and this is still an element based event, right?

If you limit it to 2-3 cards in the deck that are not in your vault that would actually be an interesting boost (if I understood what you meant). My comment was more about crispy saying that boosts can easily be taken advantage from.

I liked tinkerer because it gave a more or less equal but limited access to certain decks to all teams, which means every team had good chances of beating any other team ( would have had a much harder time against for example if they didn't had to always expect bonewalls from us). It also made things more unpredictable which is good for the teams that are not doing so well and makes the later rounds more interesting imo.

[Avenger]

that's the point of boosts?

We could also let every team to use any cards. Lets call it the joker boost? Of course, we would only let one player per team per round, because we don't want it to be overpowered and this is still an element based event, right?

If you limit it to 2-3 cards in the deck that are not in your vault that would actually be an interesting boost (if I understood what you meant). My comment was more about crispy saying that boosts can easily be taken advantage from.

I liked tinkerer because it gave a more or less equal but limited access to certain decks to all teams, which means every team had good chances of beating any other team ( would have had a much harder time against for example if they didn't had to always expect bonewalls from us). It also made things more unpredictable which is good for the teams that are not doing so well and makes the later rounds more interesting imo.

Here, you talk about limitations to creativity. I did the same for the tinkerer (only pends allowed to stray from the theme of war, because with the mark, they are essentially still in element).  Equal access means this isn't a war of elements, but a war of teams. There would be no point of putting 'ruled by <element>' if they won by non-elements decks, right? Next war, if this trend continues, we better choose team names and forget elements.

[chrispybacon84]

Here, you talk about limitations to creativity. I did the same for the tinkerer (only pends allowed to stray from the theme of war, because with the mark, they are essentially still in element).  Equal access means this isn't a war of elements, but a war of teams. There would be no point of putting 'ruled by <element>' if they won by non-elements decks, right? Next war, if this trend continues, we better choose team names and forget elements.

That is exactly my point of view, and I'm sure many others believe that as well. That's what makes tinkerer somewhat broken.