War #11 - General Discussion

[JonathanCrazyJ]

[Mr Muffin]

Changing the rules to highest win rate would hurt teams that have success from large starting vault and may not have as good win rate. Weaker elements are balanced against stronger elements by having more cards in their vault so they may do just as well but have a (perhaps slightly) lower win rate. I for one would prefer to stick with the ruling of if the last 2 or 3 teams are eliminated in the same round the winner goes to who had the most cards in vault. I see your point in making the team that had the highest win rate the winner out of the last teams if they got eliminated in the same round but I think the whole idea is to have more cards than your opponent and the best win rate just helps with that.

Ideally I would think the team with the most cards would have the highest win rate anyway.

In short, more cards for the teams that got eliminated in the same round should take precedence over better win rate in my opinion.

[phoenix1211]

I hadn't checked the current winrates either, and though that feels like the most fair solution to me, I do get Muffin's point about starting vault and balance. Overall, I'd say final showdown EC is most preferable, both in terms of fairness and last-round epicness.

[Vangelios]

About the war Rank

 The first ranking criterion is and should be the round. One team in the round 10 is more than one team eliminated in the round 9  independent of winrate
 Team eliminated in the same round winrate is really important, however the number of the matches and cards too.

[Afdarenty]

I hadn't checked the current winrates either, and though that feels like the most fair solution to me, I do get Muffin's point about starting vault and balance. Overall, I'd say final showdown EC is most preferable, both in terms of fairness and last-round epicness.

Actually, do this, yeah. Go down to one deck each and play it out.

Otherwise it's going to feel awful to miss out on winning despite going out in the same round as your opponent, no matter what rule is used to determine 1st/2nd.

[deuce22]

I hadn't checked the current winrates either, and though that feels like the most fair solution to me, I do get Muffin's point about starting vault and balance. Overall, I'd say final showdown EC is most preferable, both in terms of fairness and last-round epicness.

Actually, do this, yeah. Go down to one deck each and play it out.

Otherwise it's going to feel awful to miss out on winning despite going out in the same round as your opponent, no matter what rule is used to determine 1st/2nd.

Idk, not sure I agree. What if there are 2 teams left, one with 200+ cards and one with 51 cards. You make a “final EC” where winner takes war. While the 200+ has the advantage, it is far less than if they had played it out.

Unless you have a situation where it is down to 2 teams both at 2 decks, then yeah, 1 match to rule them all sounds fine.

[Fippe94]

Pretty sure this is only for when all remaining teams die in the same turn.

[Manuel]

You just mean when all are Dead in last round?

Yep

[Afdarenty]

I hadn't checked the current winrates either, and though that feels like the most fair solution to me, I do get Muffin's point about starting vault and balance. Overall, I'd say final showdown EC is most preferable, both in terms of fairness and last-round epicness.

Actually, do this, yeah. Go down to one deck each and play it out.

Otherwise it's going to feel awful to miss out on winning despite going out in the same round as your opponent, no matter what rule is used to determine 1st/2nd.

Idk, not sure I agree. What if there are 2 teams left, one with 200+ cards and one with 51 cards. You make a “final EC” where winner takes war. While the 200+ has the advantage, it is far less than if they had played it out.

Unless you have a situation where it is down to 2 teams both at 2 decks, then yeah, 1 match to rule them all sounds fine.

This would only be for cases where the final teams are all eliminated in the same round.

[deuce22]

So, we now seem to be entering the situation as discussed above. Team A has slightly more cards, while team B has fewer cards but a potentially unbeatable deck.

Option 1: 1 match to determine winner, team B not only improves their odds, but are likely to win with the unbeatable deck
Option 2: play 2+ matches, and team A has the advantage given their larger card pool. Even if team B has an unbeatable deck, the other match would be up for grabs giving both teams a reasonable chance.


What do people prefer in this scenario? Should one team having an OP deck have any bearing on the decision?

[JonathanCrazyJ]

So, we now seem to be entering the situation as discussed above. Team A has slightly more cards, while team B has fewer cards but a potentially unbeatable deck.

Option 1: 1 match to determine winner, team B not only improves their odds, but are likely to win with the unbeatable deck
Option 2: play 2+ matches, and team A has the advantage given their larger card pool. Even if team B has an unbeatable deck, the other match would be up for grabs giving both teams a reasonable chance.


What do people prefer in this scenario? Should one team having an OP deck have any bearing on the decision?

Dude, there is no way the thing can happen this round. Only happens if both teams are eliminated the same round in the normal fashion

[deuce22]

So, we now seem to be entering the situation as discussed above. Team A has slightly more cards, while team B has fewer cards but a potentially unbeatable deck.

Option 1: 1 match to determine winner, team B not only improves their odds, but are likely to win with the unbeatable deck
Option 2: play 2+ matches, and team A has the advantage given their larger card pool. Even if team B has an unbeatable deck, the other match would be up for grabs giving both teams a reasonable chance.


What do people prefer in this scenario? Should one team having an OP deck have any bearing on the decision?

Dude, there is no way the thing can happen this round. Only happens if both teams are eliminated the same round in the normal fashion

My question still stands as a scenario for further discussion as it is still possible