War #12 - Planned Changes (Work In Progress) (Discussion)

[ddevans96]

3: I don't think simply being OP is reason enough for baning or restricting. Cards like graboids and nova may be OP, but they are also used by almost all teams and are therefore balanced out.

In order to create versatility and attract players to war, war needs to change from time to time. The market was one big change and adding shards was another. I'm not against in principal to change war. If that includes baning I'm not necessarily against it.

Right - so what better way to change the meta of War than applying some limitations to cards like Graboid that have been in literally every vault for eight years? It's not just a balance suggestion.


Related suggestion - if we want to simplify War, but don't want to go back to the old 1=1 system (which I dislike for balance reasons) why not tier every card? Just make the filler and super niche cards cost 1 and all the OP stuff cost 5 or 10 or however you want to scale it (tweak initial pre-draft/auction total to adjust obv)

[CactusKing]

Related suggestion - if we want to simplify War, but don't want to go back to the old 1=1 system (which I dislike for balance reasons) why not tier every card? Just make the filler and super niche cards cost 1 and all the OP stuff cost 5 or 10 or however you want to scale it (tweak initial pre-draft/auction total to adjust obv)

Congratulations, you've invented the market!

[ddevans96]

Congratulations, you missed the point entirely!

I'm very obviously talking about simplifying the market.

[Blacksmith]

3: I don't think simply being OP is reason enough for baning or restricting. Cards like graboids and nova may be OP, but they are also used by almost all teams and are therefore balanced out.

In order to create versatility and attract players to war, war needs to change from time to time. The market was one big change and adding shards was another. I'm not against in principal to change war. If that includes baning I'm not necessarily against it.

Right - so what better way to change the meta of War than applying some limitations to cards like Graboid that have been in literally every vault for eight years? It's not just a balance suggestion.

Well said. I'm open for restrictions on boids. But then we should also restrict a number of other cards fractal, dims, nova, discord, boids, sundials... And probably a few others. If we start restricting strong cards all teams use we will see more in element decks.

[ddevans96]

Well said. I'm open for restrictions on boids. But then we should also restrict a number of other cards fractal, dims, nova, discord, boids, sundials... And probably a few others. If we start restricting strong cards all teams use we will see more in element decks.

I posted my proposed list earlier in the thread, along with some considerations I've left unquoted for space:

Suggested tier list for restricting problematic cards:

tier 0:	SoFr, SoP
tier 1:	Fractal, V-Dagger, Graboid, Sundial
tier 2:	Fire Bolt, Blue Nymph, Bone Wall, Dim Shield, Discord, Miracle or Sanc

[ARTHANASIOS]

I will leave the following link here just in case someone is interested in past war suggestions (keep in mind these suggestions were made before the introduction of the market system):
http://elementscommunity.org/forum/war/war-8-suggestions-and-feedback/msg1187115/#msg1187115

[Manuel]

rather than make tier/bans or whatever it was ever considered make complex ban based on the strong card (and not based on other cards that goes in combo with it)?

best deck with sofree is monoair = ban sofree from monoair
grabois is strong in rainbows = make it usable only in mono/duos/trios

other than being easy (u might need to review the definiotion of duo or trio maybe) it also encourage players to build new decks to keep the meta fresh

other than this i really don't like the 5 match/round thing, brawl is the most mistreated competition because isn't based on pvp, now suddently become an ispiration for war? u can't compare brawl with drawing to wait online at the pc players with different timezone, u know there aren't enough players to fill 5 spots maybe not even 4/team, why u wanna force the 5 match thing?

war is supposed to be team vs team not general vs general, the general is the first to play these "empty" matches, even bidding on the strongest player of the world doesn't make u sure he will help (other than play is "normal" match) or simply he won't be able for his gmt, without even counting the risk of a player that suddently has no time at all to play

i agreed on be general thinking it was like last year, this more than a competition is a part time job

[JonathanCrazyJ]

I'd agree 4 matches per round is plenty, why pretend we can play a war like we have a large player base?

[MyNameIsJoey]

the amount of matches per team will depend on how many players we get during war. We had a very high turnout for TPVP so we're keeping all options open in case.

[deuce22]

I remember when war was 8 matches per round, and you can be damn sure that people were just as inactive back then during war time. Of vault size doesn’t change and matches go up to 5/round, war will def go quicker. Prepping for 1 more match is not likely to make a big difference in terms or time spent on war (for most people)

[Manuel]

lol i totally forgot about the poll

everyone was happy about removing market ---> poll ended with 10-7 votes for keeping it (still no idea on what that "other" options was included), classic

since most of players are now gens (lol) any news on the forced 5 matches? i have no intention (and time) to almost solo a war, u can't simply match your time with the time of 2/3 other players from all over the world and play for 2 month

daily reminder tpvp was in summer, it's halloween

[InsignificantWeeaboo]

everyone was happy about removing market ---> poll ended with 10-7 votes for keeping it (still no idea on what that "other" options was included), classic

I think this is because the other option (1:1 card ratio) wasn't a good idea either, and that no one had any idea on other alternatives.