War #3 - Feedback

[suxerz]

The match link is embedded in the elements' icon (in the "win" column).
I also knew about this only until recently... -.-'

[Onizuka]

The winning icon only works for round 2, round 1 is lacking that feature.

[Boingo]

This may be most pertinent for SG:  can we have "Lightning" and "Immortal" (and any other entries I missed) spelled correctly in the Vault spreadsheet.  Thanks!

[Onizuka]

There's also Basilisk Blood.

[Shantu]

You can fix them too, I think.. at least, I did.

[Onizuka]

You can fix them too, I think.. at least, I did.

You can fix them in round 2, but not round 1.

[Onizuka]

Since its been shown that replacements will be made even after the 1 limit is reached, I have this suggestion to change the rule:

Instead of the formula being a flat -6 penalty, I think it should be -6n. Where n=The number of people you have replaced+1

Ex: You need to replace one person, and haven't replaced anyone before hand. ( (-6)(1) )= -6, which would be the penalty.
Ex: You need to replace three people, but you've already replaced a person before hand. ( -6(2) + -6(3) + -6(4) )= -54, which would be the total penalty.

[Scaredgirl]

Since its been shown that replacements will be made even after the 1 limit is reached, I have this suggestion to change the rule:

Instead of the formula being a flat -6 penalty, I think it should be -6n. Where n=The number of people you have replaced+1

Ex: You need to replace one person, and haven't replaced anyone before hand. ( (-6)(1) )= -6, which would be the penalty.
Ex: You need to replace three people, but you've already replaced a person before hand. ( -6(2) + -6(3) + -6(4) )= -54, which would be the total penalty.

Not a bad idea actually. We might use that.

[Boingo]

The penalty for replacing players is a little backwards.  I think I understand why it was instituted, but in practice you penalize "innocent" players for the action (or inaction) of another.  E.g., If KingKiller quits the game and is replaced by a new player, then KingKiller's former teammates are A) forced to scramble to find a new player mid-War and B) have a worse Vault because of it through a card penalty.  The penalty for KingKiller's decision are not reflected on him whatsoever, but on others through no fault of their own.  One could say that the fault lies with the Master for picking a fickle player, and therefore the penalty is fairly meted against the Master's team but this fails to account for what happens when a Master quits the War/game.

I realize there is a possible exploit in all this--namely, a player could sit out the auction and then join the team of their choice for no cost.  Perhaps the best way to protect against this is to limit replacement players to those who were in the auction but failed to make a team.

I fully support a ban on participation from the next War for players who quit/drop out (with rare exception, like death in the family/kidnapping/malaria.)

[willng3]

I fully support a ban on participation from the next War for players who quit/drop out (with rare exception, like death in the family/kidnapping/malaria.)

Eh, the only issue with that is that if people see death in the family, etc. as a viable excuse, then that's going to be the excuse everyone uses for their departure since it's acting as a loophole from consequences being passed.  Plus, it's the internet; you can't exactly take everything people say for granted unfortunately.

[Scaredgirl]

The penalty for replacing players is a little backwards.  I think I understand why it was instituted, but in practice you penalize "innocent" players for the action (or inaction) of another.  E.g., If KingKiller quits the game and is replaced by a new player, then KingKiller's former teammates are A) forced to scramble to find a new player mid-War and B) have a worse Vault because of it through a card penalty.  The penalty for KingKiller's decision are not reflected on him whatsoever, but on others through no fault of their own.  One could say that the fault lies with the Master for picking a fickle player, and therefore the penalty is fairly meted against the Master's team but this fails to account for what happens when a Master quits the War/game.

Teams are penalized because:

1. It discourages Generals to bid on "high risk" players that have a high probability of either quitting the event, or getting banned from it. Some of these high risk players were recruited in this War, which led to of course teams having to find replacements. That could have easily been avoided by not bidding on them in the first place.

2. If teams are not penalized, it removes the social pressure that stops some people from quitting on a whim. If you quitting makes no difference, you are more likely to quit, compared to a situation where you quitting would hurt 7 other players. Of course there are also the selfish people who quit no matter what because they only care about themselves, but no rule will ever stop them.

I fully support a ban on participation from the next War for players who quit/drop out (with rare exception, like death in the family/kidnapping/malaria.)

We will have a new PvP warning system very soon that does something like this, only difference being that the reason why you quit, is irrelevant. Like willng3 said, people can easily lie and say whatever they like. I've heard a million reasons for quitting an event that were something like "omg something bad happened in real life", but I've yet to hear one reason that was "I just didn't feel like it". Either the members of this community are the unluckiest people in the world (getting hit by cars, eaten by bears, etc), or someone is not telling the truth.

It's all about time management and choices. If I was handing out $1000 bills to everyone who came online, we would have zero "real life issues".

[BluePriest]

Teams are penalized because:

1. It discourages Generals to bid on "high risk" players that have a high probability of either quitting the event, or getting banned from it. Some of these high risk players were recruited in this War, which led to of course teams having to find replacements. That could have easily been avoided by not bidding on them in the first place.

2. If teams are not penalized, it removes the social pressure that stops some people from quitting on a whim. If you quitting makes no difference, you are more likely to quit, compared to a situation where you quitting would hurt 7 other players. Of course there are also the selfish people who quit no matter what because they only care about themselves, but no rule will ever stop them.

Only problem I see with this is that Some players really couldnt have been know, and were probably low risk. Glitch, GG, JMDT, I mean, who would have expected them to drop out in the middle of war? Im not saying if their reasons were good one way or another, but if veteran members like these are more than willing(3) to leave their team hanging, and ignore social pressure, then what is to stop someone else from doing the same?  It feels like more "low risk" players are leaving than the "high risk" ones.  i know its a gamble one way or the other, and dont get me wrong, entropy is enjoying watching the other teams crumble, but it really doesnt seem fair to the teams. Losing a player can be hard enough on its own without the penalty added to it.