War #3 - Feedback

[Kael Hate]

Event cards are great but need to be changed so that they can only come at certain times. Round 10 event card seems to screw UW kindof hard no matter where in the war it lands. ( While UW is in the war. )
Event cards that really hurt small vaults should be limited to the first 5-6 rounds of war. Making the little guy have to fight an uphill battle even harder is not good.
UW should enter the war round 4 with 350 card vault. It would still be near the bottom if not there. This will also get rid of most teams crying "Oh they know our vaults already when they enter the war, that is such a big advantages, cry cry cry, and they get to use any cards? Thats so unfair!"
Those people annoy me because they have never had to deal with the handicaps we had to, and should shut thier mouths and sit down. Honestly UW is nothing like you all seem to think.

Somewhat Agree.

[deuce22]

Event cards are great but need to be changed so that they can only come at certain times. Round 10 event card seems to screw UW kindof hard no matter where in the war it lands. ( While UW is in the war. )
Event cards that really hurt small vaults should be limited to the first 5-6 rounds of war. Making the little guy have to fight an uphill battle even harder is not good.
UW should enter the war round 4 with 350 card vault. It would still be near the bottom if not there. This will also get rid of most teams crying "Oh they know our vaults already when they enter the war, that is such a big advantages, cry cry cry, and they get to use any cards? Thats so unfair!"
Those people annoy me because they have never had to deal with the handicaps we had to, and should shut thier mouths and sit down. Honestly UW is nothing like you all seem to think.

Honestly LD, I think that UW starting in Round 4 with a 350-card vault would only hurt UW even further because you are right in that you will be near the bottom in total cards. UW's major weakness is their starting vault, not their 3-card limit. You guys have made some great decks this war given the UW deck constraints, but starting off 4-4 in Round 5 is not going to give you much of a chance to adjust.

The only way to make it "fair" for UW is if they enter war in Round 1. But that is near impossible given the UW tournament. It might be possible to do the UW tournament within a week of the auction, and have UW enter Round 2. At that point, vaults are affected pretty minimally, and it would allow UW to adjust after a mediocre start if it were to happen.

Lastly, I don't remember anyone complaining about how UW has this "big advantage" over all other teams. What I do recall is UW teammembers complaining about how much of a disadvantage you are at compared to everyone else, and other people responding by stating what advantages you did have. Not saying you were one those (I don't remember), but please don't be a hypocrite LD and act like UW was this humble team from the beginning.

[phaedrus]

IMO, the underworld system is fine how it is.
Round 5 seems like a fine time to enter, and the amount of time between the end of the UW tourney and round 5 makes it a challenge to get organized in time when everyone on the team is a war rookie. I don't think I've ever personally complained about the 3 card limit (I think its fun), but it may be true that a couple people on our team may have. The argument that we were at an advantage because of our knowledge of other teams vaults isn't really that valid because we had to build our vault/(and non-bow decks) before we knew our round 5 opponents. Not many people made that argument but I think they perhaps would have if we had done better than 4-4. I think that if an underworld team was really well organised or had 1 or 2 war vets then it could potentially seem overpowered in round 5, but even then I think there would be significant vault and deck building challenges which would make it difficult for a winning UW team to continue to win.

I agree that event cards would be best made such that there are 3-4 groups of cards which enter the war at different times to help balance.

[Sevs]

In round 5, when we started 3-0 people chat was filled with how UW should be nerfed lol. Then we went 1-4   I feel round 5 is a reasonable place to start because with any more room in the vault, counters would be much easier to make because you have pretty much every card at your disposal. the 288 card vault is pretty much average vault size and was just right. I think the reason LD wants to start earlier is that UW loses a player unless they go 7-1 which is kind of ridiculous. It is just unlucky to whoever put the effort into contributing to building the vault, decks and strategy to only play 1 war match. 5-3 is down to 6 players, and 4-4 i think is 5 players left. If UW came in a round earlier, it might not help their chances to win but would at least be a bit more enjoyable to those at the bottom of the playing order.

And as everyone else is saying, the Event cards should be placed into categories into which rounds they should belong to. Ex. That mono deck card should be past round 5 and as much as i feel this round 10 event card hurts UW, i think it would be hard to come up with event cards for such a long event with a rainbow element thrown in there. If All # of a certain element event cards were removed to accomodate UW, there really wouldnt be much variety in the event cards. I think the event cards are fine

[LongDono]

Event cards are great but need to be changed so that they can only come at certain times. Round 10 event card seems to screw UW kindof hard no matter where in the war it lands. ( While UW is in the war. )
Event cards that really hurt small vaults should be limited to the first 5-6 rounds of war. Making the little guy have to fight an uphill battle even harder is not good.
UW should enter the war round 4 with 350 card vault. It would still be near the bottom if not there. This will also get rid of most teams crying "Oh they know our vaults already when they enter the war, that is such a big advantages, cry cry cry, and they get to use any cards? Thats so unfair!"
Those people annoy me because they have never had to deal with the handicaps we had to, and should shut thier mouths and sit down. Honestly UW is nothing like you all seem to think.

Honestly LD, I think that UW starting in Round 4 with a 350-card vault would only hurt UW even further because you are right in that you will be near the bottom in total cards. UW's major weakness is their starting vault, not their 3-card limit. You guys have made some great decks this war given the UW deck constraints, but starting off 4-4 in Round 5 is not going to give you much of a chance to adjust.

The only way to make it "fair" for UW is if they enter war in Round 1. But that is near impossible given the UW tournament. It might be possible to do the UW tournament within a week of the auction, and have UW enter Round 2. At that point, vaults are affected pretty minimally, and it would allow UW to adjust after a mediocre start if it were to happen.

Lastly, I don't remember anyone complaining about how UW has this "big advantage" over all other teams. What I do recall is UW teammembers complaining about how much of a disadvantage you are at compared to everyone else, and other people responding by stating what advantages you did have. Not saying you were one those (I don't remember), but please don't be a hypocrite LD and act like UW was this humble team from the beginning.

You have it backwards, I listed our disadvantages when people complained that UW had an advantage that was kindof unfair I remember it well I am not being a hipocrite at all, I don't like it when people complain about how we have an advantage.
A; We had not one person who had played in war before.
B: Basic deck building is finding a combo and building around it. The 3 card limit makes this hard.
C: 2 or more losses in our first round ment we lost atleast one player.
I am just listing these so you guys know, I am not complaining, but when talking about UW it should be good to know it's disadvantages.
If nothing else UW should be able to hire an advisor.

[deuce22]

LD, you may not actually be complaining, but it comes across that way (damn the internet!). The main reason for that is because all you ever focus on are UW's disadvantages. If you at least recognize the advantages that you do have then compare/contrast the significance of the 2 and determine that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages while suggesting reasonable changes, that will come across more as an analysis than complaining, and people won't get as annoyed (despite your intention of not complaining).

This is the last comment I will make in regards to this because this is not the place for this discussion. If you want to discuss this further LD, you can PM me or find me in chat. I look forward to our match this round, and good luck to you and team .

[Skydaemon]

If nothing else UW should be able to hire an advisor.

You know, I was thinking that all war teams might be better off with 1 extra player who doesn't play.  So if you want 8 matchups per team, they'd have 9 players with one non-fighting member.

War has a fair bit of overhead, making spreadsheets, testing decks, analyzing opponents etc.  So early in a war, this leaves one extra person to set up stuff like this and get the teams set up without interfering with the players testing/preparing for their own matches.

Later on in the war, when someone on the team leaves, this 'extra' player, becomes the first replacement player.  So if a team has 8 fighters, and 9 players, when someone leaves the team permanently, the 9th player takes their fighting spot, and the team loses their extra spot as the penalty (instead of a card penalty for the first one).  It's sort of like having a spare player for something that seems to happen a lot.  Teams that don't end up needing a replacement, retain an advantage of an extra builder/tester/whatever throughout the war.

This extra player could also double as an extra sub (with the salvage penalties) for hard to arrange matches.

[suxerz]

That's actually not a bad idea. I really can't see any harm in going with this suggestion. Like you said, it can help to remedy few issues and enable more people to participate in war but at the same time not creating more problems. As always Generals can decide to rearrange the team order to include the extra player in a match.

One thing though, IF we want to take this suggestion, will it have a significant effect to the auction process? ...and what should be the name of this 'extra' player? We already have dogsbody. >.<

[Skydaemon]

One thing though, IF we want to take this suggestion, will it have a significant effect to the auction process? ...and what should be the name of this 'extra' player? We already have dogsbody. >.<

Not sure it matters how it's done as long as it's the same for all teams.  It could just be an extra player in the auction process.

Alternatively, because they're non-fighting roles and you don't want to surprise people by telling them they can't play, you could make a separate auction category.  Right now there's slaves, loyalists and mercs.  Maybe there's a 4th category for this, where players that want the non-fighting role have to register separately, and each team must pick one player from that section.  The main advantages to separating them, is the players have agreed to the role in advance of bidding.  That means they can customize their applications to the relevant stuff for this role, and no one has hard feelings about not playing matches.  Being a non-fighting role, does make it different in nature from the rest of the spots being bid on, with potentially different skillsets.

As for the name, doesn't matter to me, but it could be something like tinkerer, Whisper (the old guy in the blade movies), Cyd (the engineer from final fantasy), armourer or something like that.  The idea being a person back in the shop building stuff which the team uses.  It's a common enough theme anyway.

[phaedrus]

I think it would be cool for this potential non-fighting team member to have a different auction place all together.
I don't know what we could call it, but I think so long as there are enough players who are willing to function in that capacity it would be cool. ie, Palace + Mercenaries guild + Slave market + (insert name)

If you don't make it its own position then its more a bottom of the totem pole/alternate kinda idea, and I wouldn't like that.
I see the position as a kind of Mage/Sorcerer feel too. Praying to the rng Gods and sh**.

For UW, I think the way to go would be to have the tourney as normal and have the top 8 form the team and then have this team select a Mage out of those who got knocked out in earlier rounds. This war there were plenty of good players who didn't make it into underworld and would have been great additions to the team. It also takes away from the potential unfairness of two great players being matched in the tourney.

[suxerz]

Nah.. I don't think an extra category is necessary. Most people want to play which could means not enough picks. Besides, I think by simply stating your willingness to be the "extra" guy in the application will do just fine. And I think the suggestion for UW will be okay too. It'll be like a mini auction without costing any cards.

About the name, we already have dogsbody.. how about "nobody"? j/k... Yeah, we need a really cool name for that. Not significant, but it would help encouraging people to offer themselves for this role.

[Higurashi]

War without the fighting is like office work, or homework. If a player that gets to fight and win isn't motivated enough to do the paperwork, someone who won't even seem like a part of the team to everyone else won't have any motivation whatsoever. Having a separate team for card design is justified enough, but putting the pressure on one person to do the paperwork isn't beneficial for anyone. In fact, if a fighting member doesn't do their duties, they'll fall behind as to what's going on in the team.