Sideboards -- As a role I like it... and at 3 cards. As an addition to EVERY role/player or up to 6 cards I do not like it.
Market -- As stated by others I feel this set of WM's will handle as well as could be expected for this feature's 2nd-run. I really like the idea from Zawadx about the certain-element-disadvantage being addressed, at least attempted to be addressed, by in-element discounts rather than overall-cost-lessening.
SDCTP -- I have no issue with the proposed "Total Discards" and "Salvage" values but would like to ask for clarification on discards from deck, discards from vault, and the phrase/sub-note '"Vault discards" can also be picked from the losing deck.' as it seems to contradict the idea that the two categories of discard are even separate/different.
5-player teams -- *sigh* I vacillate wildly on this constantly back-and-forth. I have led two War teams and I have participated on two War teams all of which had inactives (in one of the four it was ME for part of the event!) and/or no-shows (oh so much worse). Let me explain both of my two-face sides on this issue/topic:
"Max players" (in our usual case, this is '6'): Pros - This. Promotes. Involvement. The members of EtG community that know this ride tend to do their best to recruit to the War event when we know the teams will be forced to have 6 players. Also, more slots open for the newer, unheralded, or unknown players to get into the event and get a taste for it. (I myself am a one-time 1-card auction bid onto a team of Shantu's that cemented Death's place at the top of my favorite list -- I now have two Death Trial titles and am chasing a third!) [Refer to most of the Less Players' cons]
Cons - Some generals will be, or will feel, forced into drafting players that make them uncomfortable to have on their team. [Refer to most of the Less Players' pros]
"Less players" (in our usual discussion this is '5'): Pros - Smaller teams have many benefits.
(a) less chance of having inactive players / more inactive players on a team
(b) no need for any rules about sitting out players and having to consider abuse of that rule/aspect
(c) reduction of the Herculean deckbuilding efforts required each round, specifically on teams where a player is inactive or less-egregiously a team with a player or two having a busy week or RL schedule {especially true if the all-role's-sideboard makes it into the ruleset}
(d) assists with this obsession about "shortening the event" to less than X rounds aiming at some seemingly arbitrary Y round ideal-length event
(e) [Refer to most of the Less Players' pros]
Cons - We run the risk of keeping a player out of the event that might have developed into part of the future PvP-or-otherwise contingent of this forum and game. I know many of us played the game or were on the forum prior to participating in a War event but I know that is was a major player in my sticking around and deciding to hone my skills, deepen my community involvement, and even plays a roll in my deciding to defend my title.
* Sidenote: For me this risk is not as major as others tend to see it... there are a lot of PvP events and other going on around here that if War was "make or break" for a player to stick around then I'm not sure they would have stuck anyways. While this may be a controversial comment to some (hopefully not) I stand by it: Keeping the quality of teams up in the War event should be an increased priority compared to recent running of the event.
Upgrade allotments -- I generally agree in this strategy, Generals highest with Lt less than Gen but more than any other role. Given reign over the actual value I'd go more for 12-10-8-6 - any chance you can give reasoning for the seemingly odd "7" for vanilla upgrade role upgrade counts? Also the wording seems off almost implying you HAVE to upgrade three in-element cards... It is more akin to upgrade counts of 9-7-5-3 (Gen-Lt-Role-Others) with a bonus +3 any in-element upgrades.
Soldier boosts -- As Zawadx stated...
Gambler's low payout was prolly due to variance: please try to make it less of a... well, gamble?
25% has performed decently in Trials, so maybe start there for Tinkerer? Of course in Trials it's to ensure you're duoing with another element instead of building an in-element mono, while here it's to prevent off-element monos so there's prolly differences.
Upgrade boost is too weak now, whaaa. Still think Lt. should just be a second stab at every role, maybe with +1 upgrade?
.
Relics -- I'm not happy to admit it but I have never reached rounds of War where relics meant anything more than "we expect any round now could be our last, so we'll pump relics at our weakest opponents to try to extend our War-event-lives". Therefore, my opinion here is rather weak and underinformed/inexperienced in its support and foundation. Hence, I must defer to others' opinions on this matter.
