Just a thought. When the Oracle spins it lights up X amount of elements. You can only use cards of those elements in your deck. (Any MARK) ... X could be anywhere from 2-12. The element of the card you get is always lit up.Picture of how it might look by Xenocidius:
(forgive my poor editing skills)
(http://imageplay.net/img/m7Gbd209966/oracle_wheel.jpg)
Thoughts on this?
(http://i53.tinypic.com/2ns3ok0.jpg)
No.What, and having every single deck used the same cards is unbiased?
That makes the arena biased. Unbiased arena > Biased arena.
zanz did talk about adding some "guilt" to the AI. Something like, they won't chain the same spells multiple turns in a row. This could help balance out supernovas, potentially.The guilt (nice term for it btw) only covers BH, EQ, silence, and nightmare.
The guilt (nice term for it btw) only covers BH, EQ, silence, and nightmare.That doesn't mean it couldn't be extended to other cards. The main question is if it would benefit the arena.
Banning cards is a horrible idea, because the selection of those cards is arbitrary complaints. What decides if a card is overpowered now? "Oh noes, my opponent brought Antimatter! Someone please ban his deckchoice so I don't lose again!"I agree. The guilt suffers the same problem.
IMO, all problems come from the double draw.What if... the person with Double Draw skill would be allowed only 3 copies of each card in the deck, instead of 6?
In theory, all cards are currently balanced, otherwise we should be seeing some serious balancing in 1.28.This theory falls flat because card balance varies wildly in different environments. A card that's balanced for PvP might be completely overpowered in the hands of a 200 HP deck with double draw and 3x mark.
if these were to be banned, surely creamation would also be bannedCremation doesn't allow you to more or less ignore your oracle card.
I think there need to be a couple banned cards in arena, namely Supernova and Quantum Towers. The problem with them is that people have decided that they'll just toss whatever the oracle card is into the same old rainbow deck because it can handle some dead cards. The result is that at least half the decks you play against are basically the same thing.
Except that won't really work. With an FG's boosted mark, denying them the entropy quanta to get going doesn't really work. You might be able to build a dedicated denial deck with some gravity nymphs, because they have enough SNs than BHs won't really phase them.I think there need to be a couple banned cards in arena, namely Supernova and Quantum Towers. The problem with them is that people have decided that they'll just toss whatever the oracle card is into the same old rainbow deck because it can handle some dead cards. The result is that at least half the decks you play against are basically the same thing.
Wait -- on the one hand, people are complaining that Platinum is too hard -- and on the other, they're complaining that half the decks are virtual clones of one another? Dude -- build a counter to the clone army, improve your win percentage, share your counter with everybody, and watch as people move away from that archetype because it's not successful anymore.
Ta-da! let's use one problem to solve the other!
That last part of your comment is the design flaw in the arena, THE problem, that there are far too many copies of each card when a deck is duplicatedand when every card at 6 goes to 12. It doesnt matter what the player does he will get overrun or denied with almost no resistance.Except that won't really work. With an FG's boosted mark, denying them the entropy quanta to get going doesn't really work. You might be able to build a dedicated denial deck with some gravity nymphs, because they have enough SNs than BHs won't really phase them.I think there need to be a couple banned cards in arena, namely Supernova and Quantum Towers. The problem with them is that people have decided that they'll just toss whatever the oracle card is into the same old rainbow deck because it can handle some dead cards. The result is that at least half the decks you play against are basically the same thing.
Wait -- on the one hand, people are complaining that Platinum is too hard -- and on the other, they're complaining that half the decks are virtual clones of one another? Dude -- build a counter to the clone army, improve your win percentage, share your counter with everybody, and watch as people move away from that archetype because it's not successful anymore.
Ta-da! let's use one problem to solve the other!
2# Keep the duplication and extra draw as it is and if you activated it, no more than 3 copies can be put in the deck, that way when the deck is duplicated there will be 6 copies in the final deck. The only exception would be the oracle card that would have 10 copies which seems fair and would make decks centered around what card you got. Now there wont be any, way too overpowered rushes I believe.rasta, 1337 idea is 1337
2# Keep the duplication and extra draw as it is and if you activated it, no more than 3 copies can be put in the deck, that way when the deck is duplicated there will be 6 copies in the final deck. The only exception would be the oracle card that would have 10 copies which seems fair and would make decks centered around what card you got. Now there wont be any, way too overpowered rushes I believe.+1
Please no banning cards, cause that reminds me too much of MtG. I don't understand the point of creating a card then deciding you can't use it. Nerf/Buff is all good, but no complete bans.The cards are balanced for regular PvP (completely unupped or fully upped, single mark, single draw, max 6 copies of non-Pillar/Pends), but not for situations where one can get FG stats, abuse the double-draw mechanic, and spam denial/control cards to achieve a lockdown.
This whole thread is a bunch of panic for no real reason. Talk to me again in a month now that it's live, and we'll see if you have a legitimate concern.What this smart person said.
I've been saying it for days.This whole thread is a bunch of panic for no real reason. Talk to me again in a month now that it's live, and we'll see if you have a legitimate concern.What this smart person said.
My philosophy with updates: Don't knock it till you try it.....for a month or more.
That would be horrible, double deck is actually a handicap for some decks. Withouth it (and still with double draw) some decks would become OP.I've been saying it for days.This whole thread is a bunch of panic for no real reason. Talk to me again in a month now that it's live, and we'll see if you have a legitimate concern.What this smart person said.
My philosophy with updates: Don't knock it till you try it.....for a month or more.
Though I wonder if we'd gain anything by splitting double draw from double deck.
What are you guys whining about? If everyone uses the same deck just build a deck that works well against that specific deck > Win every time.My complaint is about the lack of variety, which I find dull.
Or is it that your deck loses against these rainbow decks and instead of changing deck you want to force others to change?
Fortunately, the Arena is dynamic. If you counter the rainbows hard, people will stop building them because they'll stop working.This.
Nuff said.
How about random-banning? There are 5-10 cards that you're not allowed to use, semi-randomly selected?Like I said before, I'm all for the oracle handing out tougher restrictions on deck building. Picking banned cards at random probably wouldn't do a lot of good, though. Even if it was picking out 10 cards, chances are you'd only be missing 1-2 power cards; still plenty of others to go around. Similarly, I'd like to see more incentive for creative mono/duo decks, but outright forcing them is probably not the way to go.
I'd like to see more mono-decks. How about a 50% chance that you're required to submit a mono deck?
I personally think only Shards should be banned.Shards are absolutely no more powerful in a 200hp environment than they are in a 100hp environment. If anything, it just means that Miracle is more powerful when you have more health to heal. Arena challenger decks are already bringing more permanent control as it is.
SoDs become incredibly OP with 200 HP and Miracle, and I've seen SoGs in at least half the decks I've played against in Silver.
There's a reason why FGs don't have Shards.
And I believe that reason is, not because of the usage, but in the early days, there weren't as many shards, so putting them into fg decks would only have increased the number of shards drastically, and considering they are more rare than weapons, as a developer, you wouldn't want your game rampant with shards in the early goings. But now, I don't see any reason why some of the fgs can't have their decks changed a bit to incorporate some shards. The community now has lots, and are fairly easy to come by.I believe that FGs aren't even allowed Shards. I'm not sure though, it's something only Zanz can clarify. As for decks, I've tried JMZ classic and several CCYB variants, and although Silver is somewhat easy, Gold isn't - again, mostly because of Shards.
And again, refer to the extra large text in my previous post. If you haven't played any FGS yet, then you don't know how much money you make for an average game. It is 4-5x more when you win against platinum and fgs you can win upped cards.
----TIP----
If you can't seem to win against platinum level, try a lower one. If you cannot beat bronze, then maybe your deck sucks.
2# Keep the duplication and extra draw as it is and if you activated it, no more than 3 copies can be put in the deck, that way when the deck is duplicated there will be 6 copies in the final deck. The only exception would be the oracle card that would have 10 copies which seems fair and would make decks centered around what card you got. Now there wont be any, way too overpowered rushes I believe.Great idea! I'm all for it. Now where did I see that posted before, oh yeah, there it was: :P
Great minds think whatever...Another patch:Great thing to be able to test own Arena deck!
- Fixed the bug that didn't allow adding upped cards to the regular deck
- Added a button to test your own Arena deck
- When the AI is drawing 2 cards per turn it will refrain from chaining more than two of the following:
Silence
Nightmare
Earthquake
Black Hole
I think chaining those cards wasn't the real root of this problem. I think it was more due to the fact that there was 12 of those in a double-sized deck, so could that thing be changed somehow? For example using Dexterity Skill that doubles card drawing and deck size would also forbid you to use more than 3 or 4 same cards (doubled to 6 or 8 ) in your Arena deck.
Rock is OP, Paper is OK.This.
-Scissors
And I believe that reason is, not because of the usage, but in the early days, there weren't as many shards, so putting them into fg decks would only have increased the number of shards drastically, and considering they are more rare than weapons, as a developer, you wouldn't want your game rampant with shards in the early goings. But now, I don't see any reason why some of the fgs can't have their decks changed a bit to incorporate some shards. The community now has lots, and are fairly easy to come by.This really fits your portrait, I think. :P
I cannot understand how this poll isn't overwhelmingly pro-ban. You can make a deck with 6 Quantum Towers, 6 Supernovas, 3 Graboids, three Recluses, Lava Destroyer, Pegasus, and then just throw in whatever crappy card the Oracle gave you. Might there be a more effective deck than that? Sure. Does it go against the spirit of spinning the Oracle and forming a deck around what Lady Luck gives you? Definitely.Because pro-ban is a horrible idea that arbitrarily bans cards based on what people play? The environment needs time to develop counters, not immediately remove cards because we haven't collectively come up with a solution.
I'm tempted to go pro-ban simply because I don't feel it's right that Black Hole is largely ineffective against a large percentage of decks where it should serve as a hard counter in most normal cases and yet is laughed at because it can't keep up with the speed/quanta generation at all.
On the other hand, Rainbow has always had nearly 50 Quantum Towers in its deck so this is definitely not the first time we've encountered this type of problem.
In saying that, however, I'm almost certain than very few of us expected that type of deck format to appear on such a wide scale and it does bother me that this is the case since as of right now there is still currently no single deck listed here on these forums that has a great enough winrate to be known as a Rainbow(FG) counter. The potential for 500 of these types of decks to exist at any one time is what makes me concerned for the following reason:
There are a fair number of people who upon receiving Rainbow as their FG of the day from the Oracle would opt to refresh the page rather than fight that FG just because there is a greater chance of them winning against almost anything else even if it is a completely random pairing process against a normal FG grinder.
So if the Platinum metagame becomes nothing but these types of decks then isn't there a possibility of it becoming completely unplayed altogether?
I'd feel much more at ease if there was a limit set on these cards altogether as they are completely balanced and playable in moderation.
However, people should learn not to use them as a crutch. Ideally we see a majority of duos with mono's and trios sprinkled in. A few rainbows don't hurt, but only if they are somewhat creative/unique in design.Problem with that is that Rainbow-like decks WORK. And you are paid for your deck -> you want your deck to work. If payback is too low and you don't want it anymore you get farms. To get rid of both you need to get rid of both deck payment AND spins. But that would just lead to people not really caring.
The problem to me, is that the 'anyone can make this' rainbow + oracle decks outperform many other deck builds. My 2 oracleBow decks went a combined 50-26 (skeleton, pufferfish), but when I tried to build a legit mono air with wings, and even put a full upgrade fractix, both fell out of the top 500 within 10 games. People say 'they will build counters to the oracleBow, and change the meta', but that just isn't happening yet. Most people still use FG farmers which get hosed by 8steal, 8 deflag, 6 EQ, 8 BH, 8 Thunderstorm, 6 RT decks. Until the meta evolves, why should I get creative if my creative decks get played 10 times and make me no money?I've made 2 non rainbow decks and both have > 90% win rate. Do they use mean cards, of course. Both are also legitimate trainer tested decks that contain thought and synergy. I'd like to argue a duo or trio based on a mean combo of cards would be more effective than a rainbow based on the same combo. Rainbows are can do anything, but at the cost of speed. With a mono/duo/trio you must make your deck more focused, but it gains an advantage in speed and reliability. Even in T50, I put up monos and duos as 'biting farms'; these were built on sound deck principles and in their own right were successful PvP decks. Getting feedback, many of these decks had >50% win rate, some even closer to 75%. Non rainbows work, they just take work to get there.
Non rainbows work, they just take work to get there.While rainbows work, and they don't take work to get there.
When I see rainbow, I rush him out of the gym. Rainbow gets stronger with time...so don't give him any. DFSBE FTL.After 25 games DFSBE managed to kill Rainbow a whopping 4 times. Every single game I drew a Quantum Tower, over 80% of my games consisted of immediate SN play; in other words, if I lost, it had nothing to do with bad luck. So yeah when I said there wasn't a reliable counter to it on the forums, I meant there wasn't a reliable counter to it on the forums.
I don't think they use the same cards. I saw very diverse decks.No.What, and having every single deck used the same cards is unbiased?
That makes the arena biased. Unbiased arena > Biased arena.
This is a game in which people play to WIN. If Rainbow decks are the best, win/lose wise, people will use them.
This is why Platinum has the same deck over and over. And it IS broken. C'mon, 12 Explosions, 12 Steals, 12 SoGs...
In my opinion, QT should be banned, and SNovas too.
There is no data to support that rainbow decks are the best for platinum. We do however know it takes much less effort and deck buiding skill to put a working one together. I have a duo and *gasp* a trio with over 90 % win rates. God forbid someone actully take time to plan out, quanta balance, and test a deck before submission to the arena rather than dumping a bunch of cards and QT's together.Also, I think it bears consideration that putting rainbows together, by and large, takes vastly less money than duo/trio decks. True, rainbows are often fatter and costlier to build than your typical mono/duo/trio--but once you build them you have a lot of cards that can easily be reshuffled into other decks. There are plenty of different styles of rainbow decks that have varying strengths and weaknesses despite sharing a good number of cards (particularly towers/supernovas)--once you have one, you can easily build others. Mono/duo/trio decks, in contrast, are by their nature more specialized and it's a steeper investment to build them since you need a huge pool of cards for each individual element. Towers are the biggest culprit, especially with pendulums in the mix--being able to get your game going one turn earlier makes them a hugely important upgrade, you need tons of them, and they're not easily transferable between decks of different elements. So that might be a contributing factor to lack of variety.
In the platinum ranks, any player should have a ton of upped cards. This includes towers/pendulums. Most gold players will have a share of upped towers and pends as well.There is no data to support that rainbow decks are the best for platinum. We do however know it takes much less effort and deck buiding skill to put a working one together. I have a duo and *gasp* a trio with over 90 % win rates. God forbid someone actully take time to plan out, quanta balance, and test a deck before submission to the arena rather than dumping a bunch of cards and QT's together.Also, I think it bears consideration that putting rainbows together, by and large, takes vastly less money than duo/trio decks. True, rainbows are often fatter and costlier to build than your typical mono/duo/trio--but once you build them you have a lot of cards that can easily be reshuffled into other decks. There are plenty of different styles of rainbow decks that have varying strengths and weaknesses despite sharing a good number of cards (particularly towers/supernovas)--once you have one, you can easily build others. Mono/duo/trio decks, in contrast, are by their nature more specialized and it's a steeper investment to build them since you need a huge pool of cards for each individual element. Towers are the biggest culprit, especially with pendulums in the mix--being able to get your game going one turn earlier makes them a hugely important upgrade, you need tons of them, and they're not easily transferable between decks of different elements. So that might be a contributing factor to lack of variety.
In the platinum ranks, any player should have a ton of upped cards. This includes towers/pendulums. Most gold players will have a share of upped towers and pends as well.It depends a bit on your gold:score ratio. A dedicated FG farmer is going to have pretty much all the upgrades they would ever want by the time they hit platinum, because most of their money is coming from card sales that don't affect their score. Someone grinding the whole way up via AI3 and T50 is not going to have anywhere near everything upgraded, and chances are most of their upgrades are going to be aimed towards rainbow decks (because again, it makes economic sense to upgrade the most flexible cards first instead of sinking 50k into building a more specialized mono.) I regularly see unupped cards in gold and plat, although admittedly there's no real way to tell if that's because people are unwilling to sink points into boosting the upped card limit for their arena deck or if they're unable to field a fully upgraded arena deck. By the time you're high enough level to max everything, yeah, you've got everything upgraded period.
Rainbows are can do anything, but at the cost of speed.Rainbows dont need speed. They use a lot of cheap cards they can use to control opponent creatures and permanents in early game. And, with double draw, there is not much a normal deck can do. Rainbow FG has 'just' 6 steals and 8 explosions, and its already a lot. With more, and some EQs, you will most probably have no permanents until you are dead. Wanna create a immo deck? Good, but your creatures will die, and you wont bring it even to 100 HP, even more with it having shards. Its just efficient. People could learn how to create a fun duo, but why they would do that? To have a worse win rate?
I have never used a rainbow, except for todays deck.Rainbows are can do anything, but at the cost of speed.Rainbows dont need speed. They use a lot of cheap cards they can use to control opponent creatures and permanents in early game. And, with double draw, there is not much a normal deck can do. Rainbow FG has 'just' 6 steals and 8 explosions, and its already a lot. With more, and some EQs, you will most probably have no permanents until you are dead. Wanna create a immo deck? Good, but your creatures will die, and you wont bring it even to 100 HP, even more with it having shards. Its just efficient. People could learn how to create a fun duo, but why they would do that? To have a worse win rate?
Maybe Voodoo has a chance... if they dont start using Momentum, RTs, etc.
Looks like I got some opinions. We should restart the poll. Ban QT? Ban SN? Ban Cremation? Ban QT and SN? Ban QT and Cremation? Maybe QT, SN and Cremation??+1 to you sir. Wait, this isn't the LoL forums. Too used to saying that. :P
Anyway, Im sure QTs deserve the ban :P
nothing needs to be removed, i have no problem beating these decks. i think this thread is just a place to complain about losing to something too hard for some people. here is a suggestion, make a better deckFrom OP:
-edit-
How about instead of complaining about cards, you complain about the fact that your deck can become inactive without it ever playing a game. my new deck i put up has played 1 and lost but it went down from 257 to 360, whether or not it plays another game, it could break 500 and become inactive.
The result is that at least half the decks you play against are basically the same thing.
If Supernova and Quantum Towers were banned, it would force people to try and use their cards, or at least give a bit more variety.
How about instead of banning cards , If Dexterity = 2 ( Double deck/draw ) then you can't have more than 3(?) of the same card in your arena deck .In that case no one will use Dexterity.
Bring a Pulvy. Problem solved.I can't use pulvy with RoL/hope.
How about instead of complaining about cards, you complain about the fact that your deck can become inactive without it ever playing a game. my new deck i put up has played 1 and lost but it went down from 257 to 360, whether or not it plays another game, it could break 500 and become inactive.This has more to do with the fact that losses have a huge impact on rating. If your deck doesn't have an 80%+ win rate from the get go it's going to flush out pretty quickly.
Bring another deck. No deck can win vs everything; expecting to float through Arena like you can AI3 or halfbloods is completely wrong.How about instead of banning cards , If Dexterity = 2 ( Double deck/draw ) then you can't have more than 3(?) of the same card in your arena deck .In that case no one will use Dexterity.Bring a Pulvy. Problem solved.I can't use pulvy with RoL/hope.
The problem is the double-draw. Cards that are balanced for 1x draw are unbalanced with 2x draw.Bronze League
Consider explosion.
With 1x draw, you're sacrificing one draw to cancel one of your opponent's draws - balanced.
With 2x draw, you're sacrificing 1/2 draw to cancel one of your opponent's draws - broken.
Many of the low-cost cards are balanced for 1x draw, but unbalanced for double-draw.
I'd like to see an area of the Arena where double-draw isn't allowed.
I think people are forgetting about the people who don't play this for hours and hours each day, or haven't played for a VERY long time. I have CCYB 1.27 with all upgraded cards and thats about it for upgraded cards. I don't have stacks of electrum to go and by cards and upgrade them, just to be thrown into an arena deck for 3 days.So use unupped cards. With double draw and the like, you should be able to build very competitive decks without upped cards.
Making rules cutting out the cards that new people use to farm is just gonna make their decks get pushed down the list.
If i had money, then i would make crazier decks to test out. I play trainer just because i like making decks i can't afford here. I got a photon in the oracle so i just threw up my T50 farming deck (fire rush) and that saves me from spending alot more money to build a deck then i win from letting it sit in the arena
How many people here are actually NOT using any of the suggested cards to ban? And what category are you in, I wanna grind each category for a bit to see what decks are there.Voted yes to ban QP, and not using any of the cards in the poll. Won 60, lost 5 times with my duo in platinum after modifying once. i submited another duo w/o mentioned cards, its 8-0 atm (i expect a very nice rank with it) and intend to make non-rainbows as often as i can. But I only find rainbow decks tasteless and boring, i think they are technically fine to fight with/against.
lmao @ marv
rage more please, it entertains me
As for shards, no False Gods use shards. None. The obvious reason for this is that no one wants to fight a deck with 12 SoGs + 12 SoDs. Yet these decks are scattered all around Platinum. In my opinion, shards do need to be banned, at the very least against double draw opponents.Agreed with this.
My point would be that if you were to remove quantum towers, you would probably have a knock-on effect of further cards players would want banned because you simply would be too disadvantaged by the oracle's pick of a card.Sure, but you know you dont need submit decks everyday. If you get a useless card, skip submitting a deck with it. After 3 days your deck just get -8HP, and still can fight.
That is very dependent on your previous submission though, as the previous build must get to such as position where you don't have to use the oracle's next card.My point would be that if you were to remove quantum towers, you would probably have a knock-on effect of further cards players would want banned because you simply would be too disadvantaged by the oracle's pick of a card.Sure, but you know you dont need submit decks everyday. If you get a useless card, skip submitting a deck with it. After 3 days your deck just get -8HP, and still can fight.
I won an upped shard of divinity, which means you can win upped shards of gratitude. So banning them would mean you can no longer win them. Who wants that?Except that you win upped shards from the special spin which is completely unaffected by the cards currently in your deck; banning them from decks in the Arena wouldn't affect winning them at all.
Agree to VegeForsaken.No, 1/500 chance is low enough.
How about modify an arena deck's oppotunity to be played against based on its card usage? The more popular card you put in your arena deck, the less frequency it would be played against. That should encourage people to be more creative.
Except that you win upped shards from the special spin which is completely unaffected by the cards currently in your deck; banning them from decks in the Arena wouldn't affect winning them at all.That was not my point. The fact that we can win such a rare card already upgraded now compared to when people had to donate to get them, then to the point where you could win unupped shards very easily from t50. Donating costs money, so that is very user independant, but t50 any could do, and get them easily, now we have a new way to win upgraded ones. So it should be hard, especially since we can still win upgraded cards from fgs, there is no reason to ban any card being used in arena decks. People need to suck it up and stick it out or go back to farming FG's.
No, 1/500 chance is low enough.What if it was the ranking algorithm that was skewed? Keep the number of matches unbiased, but make it subtly harder to stay in the top 500 if you've got a cookie-cutter deck. I think that a system designed to promote the few best versions of various deck styles would be keeping with the spirit and theme of T500.
Give it up already, majority rules, and that means ban SoGs.Oh, yeah, and looks like majority will in some time vote to ban QT, lol (although we know majority does not rules, lol).
Mono: 0 additional points (color of the oracle card)This will turn many of the bronze league deck mono fire rush, mono emerald rush or mono aether. The problem is not really duo or trio, its mainly rainbow.
Duo: 4 additional points
Trio: 5 additional points
4-6 used elements: 12 additional points
7-12 used elements: 20 additional points
If anything needs to be done to these brain-fart Rainbow decks, I'd like to see yet another Skill added for giving limits on how many Elements you can use. My idea would basically work like Wisdom Skill, but instead of buying more upped cards for deck, you'd use Skill points to buy more Elements:This is interesting.
0 points = Mono,
2 points = Duo,
4 points = Trio,
6 points = Quartet,
...
22 points = Full Rainbow.
I am completely against any of these limitations on Oracle/Arena. The more restrictions you put on this, the less creativity you can have in your deck building.As counter-intuitive as it is, restrictions tend to help creativity. The old proverb that necessity is the mother of invention speaks to this; unique problems beget unique solutions.
Let's all stop acting like hitler and discontinue this topic. Let people play what ever deck they want to. It is ridiculous to limit people when the rewards are so high. So if you think the arena will become easier from banning cards, well, you wont be earning as much either.Ok, you got us. This thread is in actuality a genocidal plot and we are all in fact acting like Hitler here.
But then, you've firmly established that you are personally against any form of creativity and have repeatedly announced your intention to resist any change in favor of boring old standbys, so your lack of originality in your insults is probably to be expected.this makes no sense. banning cards limits creativity. think before you speak.
Let's all stop acting like hitler and discontinue this topic. Let people play what ever deck they want to. It is ridiculous to limit people when the rewards are so high. So if you think the arena will become easier from banning cards, well, you wont be earning as much either.Godwin's law is for reals and that makes me sad... -1 Godwin's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law)
hitler was a dictator, what part of that did you not get? he wanted things HIS WAY and you people want the arena YOUR WAY. like there was no problem with the jews, there is no problem with the arena. so just leave things alone.Its just a terrible comparison. Even democratic countries have rules that limit things people can do. This is specially important when things are one-sided. Laws that forbid commercial monopolies are an example of this.QuoteBut then, you've firmly established that you are personally against any form of creativity and have repeatedly announced your intention to resist any change in favor of boring old standbys, so your lack of originality in your insults is probably to be expected.this makes no sense. banning cards limits creativity. think before you speak.
I couldn't find a suitable thread, so i will just post my my two thoughts here.1st idea doesnt make much sense to me. Bronze league has almost no upped cards, silver also doesnt has that much. If you dont have upped cards, you simply shouldnt play the higher leagues, because its intended to be hard. This would also add something else to consider when creating a deck that I dunno if its a good idea. For example, if you have a FFQ deck, your fireflies will produce light quanta if unupped and fire if upped. A deck created to work upped wouldnt work otherwise.
How about;
- Having an unupped league, in which anyone with any score can submit unupped decks and the challengers' decks will automatically be converted to unupped versions just like PvP1. . It would be more about the deckbuilding than power of upped cards and we would get rid of shards & supernova.
- Players in the upper leagues can submit decks to lower leagues, with limited stats to maximum level of that league.
This is just asking about banning Rainbow decks from the arena.Yeah, I would love to ban rainbows from arena :)
No.
I don't have many upped cards outside my rainbow deck and SoG is quite hard to obtain.
If you ban rainbow cards, many players will have troubles in building decks!
Defeating these rainbows '12 Shards' decks using a poor newbie deck is almost impossible,Why would you be using a newbie deck against gold or platinum???? Would you use a newbie deck against a false god? Well you might, but majority of people know better than to do something so foolish.
Why dont you stop crying?Don't flame.
Making harder to submit rainbows will make submiting good decks harder... FOR EVERYONE. Whats the problem if you try different things and become a better deck builder instead of sending the same deck over and over and over again? It would still be a fine competition, rules are to all.I personally don't make rainbow decks for t500 anyway, so you're arguing against someone that is against any bans, but uses the oracle card to make decks, based on the element. I canceled my idea of having the mega healer, and now I have a destroyer rush in play, oracle gave me chaos power.
Even though I'm not necessarily in line with Bucky's comparisons, I totally agree that things should stay the way they are.First of all, do you think you are more experienced than members who suggested changes? I don't think so.
Most people who complain about Cards being op and wanting restrictions seem to be the ones losing against the higher leagues, but these are indeed not there to be beaten easily or with unupped beginner decks, Platinum decks are meant to be close to unbeatable to newbies (as are FG's)
No experienced player seems to have problems with these decks or the (lack of) deck variety you face in the Platinum league.
I find it has always been like that, even with the old t50, there have always been "decks of the moment", at some point, all you faced was Rol/Hope, another time GotP/Nightmare, then you felt like all you faced was Fire Stalls or I've GotP time...so now it's Rainbow decks... where's the problem?
As Bucky said, if you can't beat them, play a lower league.
My system to avoid being bored: I play one match in each league, Bronze to Platinum, then I start over, trying to get the extra-spin in every league, this way, I play a great variety of decks and every league is actually interesting.
So no limits, no restrictions, I like the Arena the way it is.
QuoteWhy dont you stop crying?Don't flame.
You probably didn't understand that some people want to make Arena more interesting. And that goes for deck-builders and also players facing the decks.This has nothing to do with deck builders. If you have all the cards, then you can be as creative as you possibly can. Restricting what cards you can use limits how creative you can get. This is FACT not opinion. There is no reason why the people (deck builders) can't just limit themselves personally. Let everyone do their own thing. If you want limits, then limit yourself daily, change up your deck based on your oracle card. Only use the element of the card and the 2 adjacent elements on the wheel, and nothing else. There, now deck builders have a way to limit themselves, lets see how creative they can be.
hahahahahahahaha from the person who called us all Hitler.Do take the time to carefully read each post before replying.
Well, I tried to do a diferent deck in Gold league.Well it looks like the majority of voters don't want to see Quantum Towers and Supernovas banned, so it's safe to use those.
Lasted for 4 games, and dropped out.
I had Sky Blitz as the Oracle-card. Any ideas how to make a deck with 5 of those?
AI doesn't seem to know how to use it.
Well, I tried to do a diferent deck in Gold league.(http://www.blog-n8.fr/wp-content/gallery/et-si-steve-jobs-avait-presente-le-n8/philoraptor-is-obvious-troll-obvious.jpg)
Lasted for 4 games, and dropped out.
I had Sky Blitz as the Oracle-card. Any ideas how to make a deck with 5 of those?
AI doesn't seem to know how to use it.
If you have all the cards, then you can be as creative as you possibly can. Restricting what cards you can use limits how creative you can get. This is FACT not opinion.Sure, I bet all those people submitting the same rainbow are all being 100% creative. And this is FACT, right?
Sure, I bet all those people submitting the same rainbow are all being 100% creative. And this is FACT, right?yes, yes they are. maybe in their minds they are being creative. not everyone uses the forum or elements chat or even kong chat, they simply play the game. there are a lot of people that play that you will never ever talk to. if they submit a rainbow deck everyday then one day they find out they cant, i bet they will be disappointed. also, not all the rainbow decks are the same, majority are different in some way, so each deck will offer a different challenge of some sort.
Restriction is what makes creativity in art.that is funny, i thought creativity came from inspiration. if youre an artist with limited supplies of what ever medium you use, then yes, you have to be creative with your supplies, but the arts creativity spawns from some inspiration.
yes, yes they are. maybe in their minds they are being creative. not everyone uses the forum or elements chat or even kong chat, they simply play the game. there are a lot of people that play that you will never ever talk to. if they submit a rainbow deck everyday then one day they find out they cant, i bet they will be disappointed. also, not all the rainbow decks are the same, majority are different in some way, so each deck will offer a different challenge of some sort.Not true -.- . It was obvious that rainbow decks in platinum are too common. Most mono or duo deck are found in the lower league, like bronze since many of the deckbuilder have limited selection of cards. Once you have every card its easy to realize that making a rainbow deck gives you a higher winning rate since a mono deck obviously had weaknesses that a single element can't cover (e.g. some element lack permanent control). Rainbow decks allow you not to consider the card that the oracle gives since a few dead draws won't make much difference.
that is funny, i thought creativity came from inspiration. if youre an artist with limited supplies of what ever medium you use, then yes, you have to be creative with your supplies, but the arts creativity spawns from some inspiration.:)) thats so off-topic. How does art creativity had anything to do with supernova, QT or SoG?Hmm...
Do take the time to carefully read each post before replying.:)) so which post have anything to do with Hitler?
I find it funny that you are argueing for SoG's and not banning anything saying it brings more creativity, when your deck consists of 6 Sancs, 6 SoG's, miracles and uses your oracle card as a dead card. and you have used that setup before. You even took down your creative deck because it was not doing that well. This just proves that you need to ban certain cards to shift the balance towards more creative decksQuoteSure, I bet all those people submitting the same rainbow are all being 100% creative. And this is FACT, right?yes, yes they are. maybe in their minds they are being creative. not everyone uses the forum or elements chat or even kong chat, they simply play the game. there are a lot of people that play that you will never ever talk to. if they submit a rainbow deck everyday then one day they find out they cant, i bet they will be disappointed. also, not all the rainbow decks are the same, majority are different in some way, so each deck will offer a different challenge of some sort.QuoteRestriction is what makes creativity in art.that is funny, i thought creativity came from inspiration. if youre an artist with limited supplies of what ever medium you use, then yes, you have to be creative with your supplies, but the arts creativity spawns from some inspiration.
You even took down your creative deck because it was not doing that well.i did not resort to a rainbow deck like all the nubs. and like everyone else, i want my deck to do well so it makes me money. and that is what the arena is supposed to be about, not who can create the most unique deck. we have weekly tourneys with actual rewards that have restrictions all the time. if you want to be creative, thats where you want to do it at.
1) bored of seeing rainbow decks - invalidThey look valid to me. Explain why are those reasons invalid.
2) people want deckbuilders to be creative - invalid
3) too hard due to an inadequate deck and/or library - invalid
I find it funny that you are argueing for SoG's and not banning anything saying it brings more creativity, when your deck consists of 6 Sancs, 6 SoG's, miracles and uses your oracle card as a dead card.Hypocrite?
i did not resort to a rainbow deck like all the nubs.But you did resort to a deck that you can plug in any card and still work, which doesn't make you any better.
I might want to add that creativity was the reason ZANZARINO created the arena.quote please?
Honestly, this whole debate seems pointless to me. person x wants more creativity. Everyone must bend to person x's will and be creative. Just like everyone else.Look at who started the "pointless" thing:
+1 blueThis is from someone who started a pointless off-topic debate about Hitler and art creativity. Fail, seriously.
The cards are the cards, as they are. If you think they need to be banned freom the arena, think if they need to be nerfed alltogether.Correct. Me personally feels supernovas and SoGs need nerfing. Supernovas are kinda OP when the arena deck draws more than one cards.
I'm in top 10 in plat. My deck run 0 Sn and 0 QT (0BH and grav nymph too)The problem is not in the difficulty of rainbows, but in their number :3
Since I am quite sure this is sarcasm... There are 500+ people in platinum. Im sure quite a few of them will test their deck. I'm also sure quite a few of them won't. I don't test any of my decks. All I do is think of a non rainbow concept, and put it together. No testing at all. I use the arena as my testing ground.If you restrict rainbows, then all that will happen is all the pulverizer decks will look the same, all the Photon decks will look the same ect ect ect. Eiither that or platinum will become less worthy because instead of throwing in rainbows that can hold up a fight if a monkey builds them, people will try to make good non rainbow decks, however they wont test them, so they will be weak and platinum league will end up being boring.Oh, yeah, I forgot this. Platinum league people are stupid and unable to test their own non-rainbow decks. They need a monkey built rainbow deck for sure. Good to know. Even more because I know Im also stupid and unable to test my deck. +1 blue.
The problem will probably become the difficulty (or lack thereof) if these cards are restricted.I'm in top 10 in plat. My deck run 0 Sn and 0 QT (0BH and grav nymph too)The problem is not in the difficulty of rainbows, but in their number :3
Maybe should we allow an help to player who try to build original/creative deck ? I mean the deck helper can help to build something else than a bow. I hope this will be a good way to see some news things in arena and then give more fun to all !The thing is, how many good decks can you build that have 5 pulverizers? Sure, people want a creative deck. That is probably their 2nd priority. The first one being win rate. So all pulverizers decks will end up looking the same. Sure there will be more variety as far as deck type. But everyone of a specific card will have essentially the same deck still.
Yeah, Im sorry, I really was in sarcastic mood earlier today, and I will try to avoid it. About the topic, I always test my deck. I understand some people dont do it, but even if the deck is a little crappy, it should be dangerous with all those FG advantages. And if we want estimulate players to take it more seriously, increasing / spreading rewards could be of great help. I have suggested something about this here (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/topic,28398.0.html).Since I am quite sure this is sarcasm... There are 500+ people in platinum. Im sure quite a few of them will test their deck. I'm also sure quite a few of them won't. I don't test any of my decks. All I do is think of a non rainbow concept, and put it together. No testing at all. I use the arena as my testing ground.If you restrict rainbows, then all that will happen is all the pulverizer decks will look the same, all the Photon decks will look the same ect ect ect. Eiither that or platinum will become less worthy because instead of throwing in rainbows that can hold up a fight if a monkey builds them, people will try to make good non rainbow decks, however they wont test them, so they will be weak and platinum league will end up being boring.Oh, yeah, I forgot this. Platinum league people are stupid and unable to test their own non-rainbow decks. They need a monkey built rainbow deck for sure. Good to know. Even more because I know Im also stupid and unable to test my deck. +1 blue.
I truely believe banning certain cards will do more harm than good. I havent seen a reason to think otherwise. Instead of outright banning cards, a better idea would be to use peer pressure to make people use more original decks.I'd say peer pressure would not work because not every elements player read the forum or whatsoever. While nerfing some OP card like SoG might be a better idea in the long run since that card is tempting not to be put on another ~bow deck because of its flexibility, in the mean time, I personally didn't see how banning SoG will be harmful, as in my humble opinion they are there to help people "farm" and not to be dumped inside another "made your own FG" deck.
I think if SoGs were made Life cards (as Zanzarino was thinking to do) and a system like majofa suggested would exist, everything would be more balanced and work better.SoGs = Life cards? Life already has enough healing, as well as the only other card with the ability regenerate. SoGs would make Life one of the most overpowered elements in the game.
If you had 3-4-5 elements to make your deck from (by oracle spin), then not everyone would use the same decks over and over again by just adding the 5 oracle cards in it and not many 12 SoGs 12 Sanctuaries decks would exist.
if you haven't read the entire thing, don't interject pointless comments when you obviously have no clue.You are calling I obviously have no clue. That's flaming.
if you disagree with me you are not stupid, but if you say something stupid, i will most certainly let you know, and by not reading what i write, and then posting a reply that is totally off base, that does make you stupidIn other words, I look stupid since I post what you consider off base. By saying I look stupid, you are flaming.
Let's all stop acting like hitler and discontinue this topic.You are saying everyone(all) acting like hitler. That's another flaming.
this makes no sense. banning cards limits creativity. think before you speak.In other words you are calling people brainless since they speak without thinking. Another flaming.
its basic Englishlmao
The arena is balanced. The only problem is the people thinking there is a problem with the arena. I can beat someone with 12 sogs and 12 sancs, so anyone can. There is no point in complaining about the arena if you suck at making a deck that works. actually i am pretty consistantly in the top 20 so thank you and flaming isnt really a good thing to doHonestly this flaming is ridiculous and I personally don't appreciate it.QuoteI am not doing the opposite. I am saying do not ban any cards. I use what ever cards I want, because that is how the arena is. This thread started because of rainbow decks btw, so if you haven't read the entire thing, don't interject pointless comments when you obviously have no clue. I do make decks daily, so who is not being creative?QuoteI find it funny that you are argueing for SoG's and not banning anything saying it brings more creativity, when your deck consists of 6 Sancs, 6 SoG's, miracles and uses your oracle card as a dead card.You are saying something and doing the opposite thing. I find it hard to believe that your are saying what you actually thinks, tbh, this is the kind of stuff that makes you look stupid.
OPPOSITE - 3. totally different: different from or contrary to something or each other in every respect
Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Saying I don't want sogs banned and using them is not opposite. Thanks, nice try to the both of you. Read a dictionary once in a while.
i love how you jump to your conclusion before reading anything written(kind of hypocritical). once again flaming. I specifically said that you are fighting for not banning all these cards saying "that banning them would reduce creativity". I pointed out that i find it ironic that you say those cards allow for creativity yet you use them in the most uncreative deck. And i find it slightly offensive that you are inconsiderate enough to state both of us should read a dictionary yet not once have I said something that is actually related in that post.QuoteSo people who disagrees with you are Hitler and stupid.Yet another misinterpretation. If you are just going to make up your own words instead of reading what is written then don't post any more.
1) people that want to control how others are allowed to make decks make them act like a dictator, hitler was a dictator, not a hard concept to understand
2) if you disagree with me you are not stupid, but if you say something stupid, i will most certainly let you know, and by not reading what i write, and then posting a reply that is totally off base, that does make you stupid
idk who wrote this quote nor do i care. but it is seriously offensive to just throw out names like hitler and to compare people to him is not exactly the smartest thing. My grandpa died in a concentration camp. I would appreciate if you weren't so damn inconsiderate.QuoteIt was obvious you were sparking something here with your attitude, and by saying "discontinue" this topic you are not respecting the topic creator and everyone who agreed with the idea.I don't control how other people reply. So don't ever say I was starting something, you'll know when I do.
everything was peaceful till you came and acted like you were better than the rest of us. arrogant as hell. you didnt bother to read any of the other posts to really consider anyone elses ideas or motives in their responses. I find that hypocritical as well from your capital outburst below.
READ THE ENTIRE THREAD BEFORE YOU POST, AND MAKE SURE YOU DONT INTERPRET THINGS, THIS IS NOT ENGLISH CLASS, THERE ARE NO HIDDEN METAPHORS, EVERYTHING SHOULD BE TAKEN HOW THEY ARE!!!
It is really obnoxious to use size 36 font and it is honestly a joke when you cant even follow your own :electrum refer to the previous 2 responses where you didnt read the whole post so you came to some blatantly wrong conclusion.
WE NEED TO FIND SOMETHING TO FORCE CREATIVITY IN ARENA.Which means you are hitler according to someone's definition. Try to read some post back and see how the argument starts. That was what everyone were trying to do before someone shows up and starting to call everyone hitler for doing that.
Yet another flaming, now about my English skills. So what if its not my first language?Quoteits basic Englishlmao
reread your post, then fix all your errors before telling me about basic english
lmao
The only problem I see with majofa's idea:However luck already played a huge part even before that idea got implemented. Someone might get QT or gravity nymph while I'm having Chimera. It will still be a good, if not temporary solution I think.
Example:
The oracle shows you a Steam Machine.
:life Life, :time Time, and :gravity Gravity lightens up (random) on the wheel.
So this way you are forced to make a Steam deck, possibly with a multiplied fire mark, and besides that you have 3 other elements that you use; and they may have close to no good use to you at all.
Of course, with the example above, you sure will make one creative deck, but most often than not your deck will drop out quickly from the league in subject; because others got lucky, and maybe spun some natural synergies that day.
Besides this it's a nice idea, though I doubt the Oracle is programmed to make any coherency between the things he would show.
However luck already played a huge part even before that idea got implemented. Someone might get QT or gravity nymph while I'm having Chimera. It will still be a good, if not temporary solution I think.Luck is always a factor in a game like this. Still, I did not get either QTs, nymphs, golems and such since Arena was introduced, and right now I'm still 3rd at Plat league with some lowly ice bolts (without any healing). It's just what you make of it, I believe.
The only problem I see with majofa's idea:For Steam Machine, multiplied Fire Mark and/or pendulums will solve it. And you don't have to use all the elements the Oracle lights up, you're just restricted to those ones.
Example:
The oracle shows you a Steam Machine.
:life Life, :time Time, and :gravity Gravity lightens up (random) on the wheel.
So this way you are forced to make a Steam deck, possibly with a multiplied fire mark, and besides that you have 3 other elements that you use; and they may have close to no good use to you at all.
Of course, with the example above, you sure will make one creative deck, but most often than not your deck will drop out quickly from the league in subject; because others got lucky, and maybe spun some natural synergies that day.
Besides this it's a nice idea, though I doubt the Oracle is programmed to make any coherency between the things he would show.
umm i got idea, let oracle choose you 3 different card?Yeah you'd be able to get real creative with nearly half of your deck already determined by the oracle and likely most of the rest being taken up by pillars/towers :)
this way you will get 15 unmoveable cards.
I disagree with "rainbows are effective", and I disagree with banning supernovas and QTs.I agree with you for the most part, especially when you can have 12 explosions. However, the problem (in my opinion) with SoG is not the simple 5 healing per turn, but the fact you can have 12 of them + other healing cards like Sanctuary and on top of that CC/PC like Antimatter/Deflag. This shuts down most strategies except maybe quinted growth, but you can use a protected Thorn Carapace to stop that. I still don't believe SoG should be banned, but I feel this represents a problem with game balance, but that's done elsewhere.
I agree with the point made by someone else in another thread that people submit rainbows because that's what they have upgraded.
Of course it's hard to make a good deck if the oracle gives you a 'brick' (actually 5 bricks), so maybe then a rainbow could be the less worse.
I have no idea why people would consider SoGs to be annoying, it's really just 5 healing, can't you outdamage that? or simply pulv them away?
If there is a card that perhaps we should consider restricting maybe it is explosion. That's the card i'm looking to put in the deck i submit if i can.
Voted NO. Why you ask, and you did say to explain. EVERYTHING IS JUST FINE THE WAY IT IS. If you haven't noticed by your previous polls, majority of people do not want any change at all. So quit QQ'ing about the way the arena is and suck it up and play the way it is.This said when the poll had like, hmmm, 60 votes?
This IS NOT supposed to be super easy so everyone can make 50k electrum a day. Give it up already, majority rules, and that means no change. I request a topic lock please, because you cannot fix what is not broken.
60 healing? 3 flying adrenalined staffs anyone? 60 healing is no big deal, especially since i have never played against an arena deck that has been able to get all 12 out. We have weekly tournaments with more than enough restrictions to satisfy all your banning needs. No restrictions = fun for all, and I mean this too, because there are 2000+ decks in all 4 arena categories that you can play against, yet we don't have anything close to that number in votes. so the elements forum community should not dictate how all the non forum people should play the game. I'm sure quite a few would join the forum after such a drastic change wondering why they can't play with certain cards any more. There is just not enough people involved in the voting to make this kind of change happen ever. It's around 110 people voting each time, so 110/2000 is not enough and until there is at least 50% of the people playing elements involved, any change should not happen. It would not be fair to those that do not use the forum.And this said when poll had, according to him, 110 votes. Tsc, tsc, tsc. And still feels confortable to say to others "read the thread before posting". Some people just dont know what themselves posted, huh? Or maybe ignore ethics to reach their goal.
-edit-Yeah, some FGs have healing, but they dont have all possible strategies to shut down the opponent deck together with it. Massive healing, + massive CC, + massive PC, + quanta denial, etc. How about if we allow SoGs and ban black hole, explosion, steals and pulvy, them? We could allow massive healing at cost of other strategies, like the idea? These FGs dont need nerfing, some of the rainbows in arena could use a nerf. Sorry, your argument is invalid.
ferox, firequeen, both use feral bonds, and both can get a full field of creatures. both have 12 feral bonds, and with 23 creatures in play that is a crap load of healing (276 hp/turn), so why havent these fgs been nerfed? thats too much healing, boohoo, no, just no. sogs are fine.
The only problem I see with majofa's idea:Remember, you can always let your deck from yesterday in play if things go bad (supposing its not eliminated). Also, deck building will be harder for everyone.
Example:
The oracle shows you a Steam Machine.
:life Life, :time Time, and :gravity Gravity lightens up (random) on the wheel.
So this way you are forced to make a Steam deck, possibly with a multiplied fire mark, and besides that you have 3 other elements that you use; and they may have close to no good use to you at all.
Of course, with the example above, you sure will make one creative deck, but most often than not your deck will drop out quickly from the league in subject; because others got lucky, and maybe spun some natural synergies that day.
Besides this it's a nice idea, though I doubt the Oracle is programmed to make any coherency between the things he would show.
I disagree with "rainbows are effective", and I disagree with banning supernovas and QTs.Rainbows ARE effective vs most decks. You usually need a counter deck to win vs them, if they have FGs advantages. If its what people have upgraded, possibly true, but they are platinum, and could have other cards, too. Even a partially unupped deck can be dangerous with FGs advantages. My duo deck is #5 of platinum right now and have 8 unupped cards out of 36 of the base deck.
I agree with the point made by someone else in another thread that people submit rainbows because that's what they have upgraded.
Of course it's hard to make a good deck if the oracle gives you a 'brick' (actually 5 bricks), so maybe then a rainbow could be the less worse.
I have no idea why people would consider SoGs to be annoying, it's really just 5 healing, can't you outdamage that? or simply pulv them away?
If there is a card that perhaps we should consider restricting maybe it is explosion. That's the card i'm looking to put in the deck i submit if i can.
Woot i got support :D (my ego raized about 5%)umm i got idea, let oracle choose you 3 different card?Yeah you'd be able to get real creative with nearly half of your deck already determined by the oracle and likely most of the rest being taken up by pillars/towers :)
this way you will get 15 unmoveable cards.
Seriously though, if there are too many rainbows out there, just play anti-rainbow decks or even post strong anti-rainbow decks on the forums so more people start using them against arena. Rainbow decks will lose more and either people will switch or their decks will get pushed out quickly by the ones that do.Arena Rainbow decks doesnt rly bother me that much either, sometimes i get right cards in my hand to just overcontrol them and i win, sometimes not. I gave idea out to support the ppl who doesnt like rainbow decks, but arena doesnt rly need any change, i LoWe it the way it is. I just hope more ppl would play arena and if some restrictions would help geting more ppl späm arena im happy to support good ideas.
5fc 5fc 5fc 5fc 6rl 6rl 77e 77e 77e 77e 77e 77e 77g 77g 77g 77g 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7f2 7f2
Not only was I winning more than losing, but I was winning a lot of bonus spins in the process. One 12 game winning streak yielded 4 rares.You're all wrong. I was stomping the crap out of both gold and platinum with this deck.I just tried this one out. The results were not quite as good as what you described but definitely enough to be profitable and like you said, the way this deck wins or loses so quickly is very nice. Overall, I'd say the deck is very vulnerable to a lot of different types of counters but many others that it will be quite good against. Looks like this will be especially nice for times when heavy PC and/or poison decks take over(as was the case for the first few days of Arena). If anything, I would say this is one of the best parts of arena though..you can't just use the same deck every day and expect to win...you need to have a variety of options and adapt to what's out there on any given dayCode: [Select]5fc 5fc 5fc 5fc 6rl 6rl 77e 77e 77e 77e 77e 77e 77g 77g 77g 77g 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dp 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7dq 7f2 7f2
Not only was I winning more than losing, but I was winning a lot of bonus spins in the process. One 12 game winning streak yielded 4 rares.
Also, the deck is fast, obviously, being a destroyer rush.
It works, it wins, and OBVIOUSLY there are some decks that will counter it easily, but I'd rather win a lot and fast than use slow ass ccyb or some other slow stall deck.
Before Bucky...Not really, its not really the difficulty of arena decks. Its just people get bored seeing the AI plays the same QTs, supernovas, and SoGs. Im quite sure the thread started because the OP want to see more creative decks, its just bucky started showing up and act all high and mighty how easy the arena is and saying that there is no need to change anything(with calling people names as extra sauce) and the argument of the difficulty started to show up. Its the off topicness of his posts (read: flamings) that diverted the argument many times, like "fascism" and "Creative arts" and whatsoever.
The poll doesnt show that peoplen want them banned so that the decks can be more creative, it is made up of people who want to ban them because they make it too hard.
[...] once again you have made yourself look like an idiot. [...]
*waits for whiny reply*This is completely unnecessary!
This is a discussion, not a soapbox upon which forum members are allowed to harass other forum members. Disagreements happen, and are a part of any controversial discussion. Any flaming/provoking will be removed, and the offending user will be messaged/disciplined accordingly.
Any more off-topic banter, flaming, name-calling, trolling, etc. will be grounds for a 24-hour ban. First and only warning.
Before Bucky...It's not simply a case of making it easier, it's a case of balance. You can literally add SoG to ANY deck and reap the rewards, whereas you can only add PC to a limited number of decks (the limited choice of elements with PC I was talking about) to deal with them.
The last 2 poster proved my point. It has already been established that arena is relatively easy with the right deck. The poll is made up of mainly people like the last 2 posters (-bucky) who want the arena to be easier.
It is easy enough with the right deck. Has very good rewards as well. The poll doesnt show that peoplen want them banned so that the decks can be more creative, it is made up of people who want to ban them because they make it too hard.
Sigh, Ive already pointed out that I am well aware of the OP's original reasoning for the topic, however, I am saying that although thats the OP's reason, majority of the people who are voting are voting due to the difficulty. If SoG/QT/SN were banned from the arena, they should be banned from the players deck as well. Why should we force arena participants to be creative, while allowing the challengers to use a boring rainbow or speedbow? Where you quoted me, the 2 posters before bucky outright admitted that they think its too powerful them having those cards. THAT is my point. The poll is worded in a way that shows bias, as well as how it has 2 different (and 1 of those 2 much more abundant) groups voting to ban. 1 small group that is honestly doing it for the creativity, and 1 large group that is doing it because they dont like the challenge.Before Bucky...Not really, its not really the difficulty of arena decks. Its just people get bored seeing the AI plays the same QTs, supernovas, and SoGs. Im quite sure the thread started because the OP want to see more creative decks, its just bucky started showing up and act all high and mighty how easy the arena is and saying that there is no need to change anything(with calling people names as extra sauce) and the argument of the difficulty started to show up.
The poll doesnt show that peoplen want them banned so that the decks can be more creative, it is made up of people who want to ban them because they make it too hard.
BluePriest, I think shards are used by players to balance the games when AI has 'unfair' advantages (people are able to use in normal games, but they are not needed them). This is the case, I see no problem about people using them. But allowing people creating decks use them would just increase the advantages, so that I consider a bad thing. Speedbow to fight Arena? Doesnt seem probable, they dont work vs FGs, and they usually dont use shards, anyway. People will surely use some FG Killer decks, but there will be always variations. About the poll, people is already voting to not ban QT, and that looks already enough challenge. Well constructed rainbow dont need shards to be difficult. I understand your point, however.The problem is that they are SUPPOSE to have an advantage. Shards shorten that advantage.
If Shards are banned from the arena, how do you plan on winning them?Note that the cards you are able to win from rare spins are not related at all to what cards are actually in a player's deck, so they could still be won in that way even if shards were banned from arena. On the other hand, I think outright banning ANY cards from Arena is a bad idea and I'm fairly sure Zanz also said at some point that he does not intend to do so. If shards are being used to much, just put in more permanent control in your deck or use a rush which can kill them before they have time to get to many out(or some combination of these two). If these STILL prove to be too much to deal with them, then maybe shards could be restricted or nerfed in some other way but totally banning them seems completely unnecessary.
But they do have advantages - high HP, double draw, and in Platinum leage, all the advantages of a False God. Plus, they have the advantages of being able to chuck in heavy PC, which few False Gods have due to balancing issues (there are only two False Gods with 12 PC cards, not including Seism). That alone is bad enough even without the SoGs healing them up, and using Miracle when you finally get their HP down (but that's a completely different debate).BluePriest, I think shards are used by players to balance the games when AI has 'unfair' advantages (people are able to use in normal games, but they are not needed them). This is the case, I see no problem about people using them. But allowing people creating decks use them would just increase the advantages, so that I consider a bad thing. Speedbow to fight Arena? Doesnt seem probable, they dont work vs FGs, and they usually dont use shards, anyway. People will surely use some FG Killer decks, but there will be always variations. About the poll, people is already voting to not ban QT, and that looks already enough challenge. Well constructed rainbow dont need shards to be difficult. I understand your point, however.The problem is that they are SUPPOSE to have an advantage. Shards shorten that advantage.
Regardless though, 1 area that people seem to have forgotten...
If Shards are banned from the arena, how do you plan on winning them? Not everyone has them. t50 is gone so they cant be farmed anymore. Pvp will be the only possible format to win them. Some would argue that this would make more people do pvp, however, it has extreme flaws so such an emphasis shouldnt be put on random pvp battles unless these flaws are fixed.
This just deals with SoG's of course, and I have other reasons, however, I dont remember seeing it mentioned yet.
Hmm, so you sorta completely missed the point of my post but still use me as an example of the camp that 'wants to make things easier' (with the implication that we're whining it's too hard). The problem here is you're missing the subtle distinction between making something easier so that it has more than one solution and making something easier for the sake of it.Sigh, Ive already pointed out that I am well aware of the OP's original reasoning for the topic, however, I am saying that although thats the OP's reason, majority of the people who are voting are voting due to the difficulty. If SoG/QT/SN were banned from the arena, they should be banned from the players deck as well. Why should we force arena participants to be creative, while allowing the challengers to use a boring rainbow or speedbow? Where you quoted me, the 2 posters before bucky outright admitted that they think its too powerful them having those cards. THAT is my point. The poll is worded in a way that shows bias, as well as how it has 2 different (and 1 of those 2 much more abundant) groups voting to ban. 1 small group that is honestly doing it for the creativity, and 1 large group that is doing it because they dont like the challenge.Before Bucky...Not really, its not really the difficulty of arena decks. Its just people get bored seeing the AI plays the same QTs, supernovas, and SoGs. Im quite sure the thread started because the OP want to see more creative decks, its just bucky started showing up and act all high and mighty how easy the arena is and saying that there is no need to change anything(with calling people names as extra sauce) and the argument of the difficulty started to show up.
The poll doesnt show that peoplen want them banned so that the decks can be more creative, it is made up of people who want to ban them because they make it too hard.
There are plenty of decks that work against most of the arena decks.I have to agree with bucky here. Platinum league is hard but not too hard. I believe that there are a way higher number of decks efficient in platinum league that there are against FG.
I don't want an Immolation Rush thanks... oh wait, that's practically my only option other than a cookie-cutter rainbow.You can also go shakars.
@TerrilocksThis is something I would like see you answer too, because you stated "There are plenty of decks that work against most of the arena decks". Remember this means they should have at least 50% win rate.
Have you tried other decks? If you have how many? What decks? How many games did you play with each? Are they fully upgraded decks? If not, roughly what percent of the decks you used were upgraded? What did you play against bronze, silver, gold, platinum?
No. Just No. Zanz has said that arena is suppose to give that "level 7" that so many people wanted. I would be dissapointed if you found a deck like that. It is suppose to be more difficult thanFG's by a good amount.@TerrilocksThis is something I would like see you answer too, because you stated "There are plenty of decks that work against most of the arena decks". Remember this means they should have at least 50% win rate.
Have you tried other decks? If you have how many? What decks? How many games did you play with each? Are they fully upgraded decks? If not, roughly what percent of the decks you used were upgraded? What did you play against bronze, silver, gold, platinum?
This is something I would like see you answer too, because you stated "There are plenty of decks that work against most of the arena decks". Remember this means they should have at least 50% win rate.No, I would say it means they win often enough to be profitable in the long run to use. Given that there is usually better than a 10 to 1 ratio between the cost to play each game and how much you can win(and even more if you EM or can beat one of the top 5 decks) in platinum, you could have a MUCH lower win rate than 50% and still be earning score and money very quickly. I believe Zanz said at one point that the win rate was somewhere around 33% which was roughly where he wanted it and which is still pretty good money.
"There are plenty of decks that work against most of the arena decks"Not exactly - even if it works against most of the Arena decks, it's not guaranteed to beat those ones every time.
If these decks work against MOST OF arena decks, than they should win more than 50%, agreed? Im not saying its supposed to be easy. But if there are plenty of decks that work against MOST OF arena decks, I would like to know some :)
Yeah, but sometimes you also can defeat a opponent that is normally a bad match up. If a deck work agains most of enemies, the win rate should be at least close to 50%. If there are plenty of these, maybe someone can share some.
50% is NOT good for the arena. 25% AT BEST is what I expect from the arena.This is something I would like see you answer too, because you stated "There are plenty of decks that work against most of the arena decks". Remember this means they should have at least 50% win rate.No. Just No. Zanz has said that arena is suppose to give that "level 7" that so many people wanted. I would be dissapointed if you found a deck like that. It is suppose to be more difficult thanFG's by a good amount.
Marv you want to know decks that works against which league ?Gold and Platinum. A CCYB can defeat most Bronze / Silver decks without much problem :)
50% is NOT good for the arena. 25% AT BEST is what I expect from the arena.25% win rate at best? Well, in this case I assume there are NOT plenty of decks that work against MOST of the arena decks. Of course, someone could prove me wrong.
25% win rate at best? Well, in this case I assume there are NOT plenty of decks that work against MOST of the arena decks. Of course, someone could prove me wrong.I assume that if you spend as much time trying out different decks as you have on here arguing over semantics, you'd be doing a lot better in arena ;)
This thread is a discussion about creating limits in deck creation and thats something that has to do with arena difficulty. And if there is an argument about arena being already easy, I see no reason to let it pass, otherwise it could be considered true. So its not just about semantics, but about the thread theme.25% win rate at best? Well, in this case I assume there are NOT plenty of decks that work against MOST of the arena decks. Of course, someone could prove me wrong.I assume that if you spend as much time trying out different decks as you have on here arguing over semantics, you'd be doing a lot better in arena ;)
thats what I hope for. If better is found once arena is known better, then I will be dissapointed.I had hoped the higher leagues would be harder.Marv you want to know decks that works against which league ?Gold and Platinum. A CCYB can defeat most Bronze / Silver decks without much problem :)50% is NOT good for the arena. 25% AT BEST is what I expect from the arena.25% win rate at best? Well, in this case I assume there are NOT plenty of decks that work against MOST of the arena decks. Of course, someone could prove me wrong.
Everyone has become so impressive with their decks that arena is now not fun and unplayable to me. There is enough variety in rush/stall/PC that it is overly frustration to try and play a reliable counter to me. That is all.Then dont do arena. Arena IS SUPPOSE to be harder than FG's. It is SUPPOSE to be the "ultimate challenge" or "level 7" that people use to request.
I think that this is right for platinum league but sometimes gold or even silver turn me mad..I dont have a problem with silver so much, but gold and platinum are almost indistinguishable. I do agree on that one.
Yeah.... that's what I said. I am no longer doing it. You didn't make any original point with your thoughts in this post. I merely was stating that I don't think arena is worth playing for me anymore because I don't think it is worth playing because of the frustration associated with it.Everyone has become so impressive with their decks that arena is now not fun and unplayable to me. There is enough variety in rush/stall/PC that it is overly frustration to try and play a reliable counter to me. That is all.Then dont do arena. Arena IS SUPPOSE to be harder than FG's. It is SUPPOSE to be the "ultimate challenge" or "level 7" that people use to request.
So we've all given up, huh?On what forcing people to not use decks that we dont like? Yeah. I hope so.
So we've all given up, huh?From my experience playing gold, rainbow decks are becoming less and less common. My rainbow killer is becoming less profitable. Fire, gravity and darkness (and looking at the platinum leaderboards, death as well) decks have risen to be the most powerful decks. I don't think that there is a good reason to ban cards if they aren't powering the best arena decks.
if u put sod in your deck it means:
u log the game almost daily
u are smart
most games rewards these two things
where is irony lol
nlf toros is only player, anyone can mod his deck to light mark and add sod for getting some more wins after day 7, there is nothing wrong or unfair about it
I hoped there was some irony. Because you don't have to be a good player to add a cheesy tactic to net some more wins. Yeah, I do that sometimes, too
(especially when I don't get a nice card to make another plat deck, or my current deck is top 5-ish), but calling a player "smart" because he is doing a
cheese-fest, nah. Especially when he is doing that for months.
I hoped there was some irony. Because you don't have to be a good player to add a cheesy tactic to net some more wins. Yeah, I do that sometimes, too
(especially when I don't get a nice card to make another plat deck, or my current deck is top 5-ish), but calling a player "smart" because he is doing a
cheese-fest, nah. Especially when he is doing that for months.
cheesy? it's a 50 coinflip hoping to play 2 pillars and one sod in the first turn AT BEST
Of course you will lose some edge, it is normal, you put stall cards into your deck.
But from this point it is just a matter of taste. You like SoD, while I don't when it is about arena decks, because it ruins
bronze/silver/gold and stains platinum. That's why I think it shouldn't be permitted for decks older than 10 days,
because after that it is just trolling the original spirit of arena.
And yeah, we can use anti-SoD decks for farming, but boy, are they tedious. Using Mutations and/or SoSe is much more fun,
and since I can allow myself not to farm at 100% efficiency I choose that.
But from this point it is just a matter of taste.
Honestly this necro has been so confusing that only someone like Manuel would bother to try help Wyand understand his err
Arena is broken because of 1hp & NaN, not SoD. Original post was about when shards were colorless. I wasn't around for that, but my understanding is that it was a much more broken meta than the modern QQ over sopa/sofr. So Wyand's necro'd some now irrelevant topic with a total off topic tangent that nobody can even understand the inspiration for. It's okay to not've been around in 2011, but if you're going to necro have context. Back in 2011 there was a chance that things could change (in fact, they did), but do you really think Zanz is going to come back just to ban SoD from arena??!?!?
Is Wyand proof that we live in simulated reality??
Honestly this necro has been so confusing that only someone like Manuel would bother to try help Wyand understand his err
Arena is broken because of 1hp & NaN, not SoD. Original post was about when shards were colorless. I wasn't around for that, but my understanding is that it was a much more broken meta than the modern QQ over sopa/sofr. So Wyand's necro'd some now irrelevant topic with a total off topic tangent that nobody can even understand the inspiration for. It's okay to not've been around in 2011, but if you're going to necro have context. Back in 2011 there was a chance that things could change (in fact, they did), but do you really think Zanz is going to come back just to ban SoD from arena??!?!?
Is Wyand proof that we live in simulated reality??
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 60 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
I know that SoD decks can be beaten (but I don't intend to play anti-SoD decks exclusively, no fun in that)
It was my error to step into a heated discussion about game knowledge
finally ignore Manuel
so I should've done what everyone else has done & continued to ignore this face palm inducing thread.