War #6 - Suggestions and Feedback

[eaglgenes101]

Objective rules need to be put in place regarded desync errors and connectivity issues. Decisions not covered in the rules should approximate the rules as best as possible, and priority should be given to the ruling that correctly covers the most likely situation instead of the ruling that covers the situation that everyone agrees didn't happen.

Analogy: We don't automatically charge people walking away from a dead body with murder.

[hainkarga]

Forcing high ranking teams to play 6 matches while bad ones do so few is punishing the successful teams, forcing them to suicide or field bad decks.  Previous wars has shown this has always been the case, which will probably repeat this war. Maybe change this slightly in the future Wars ?

[Avenger]

Forcing high ranking teams to play 6 matches while bad ones do so few is punishing the successful teams, forcing them to suicide or field bad decks.  Previous wars has shown this has always been the case, which will probably repeat this war. Maybe change this slightly in the future Wars ?

Letting the best team have  bye seems to be enough compensation.

[hainkarga]

Letting the best team have  bye seems to be enough compensation.

No. Bye is very random (round 6, no bye. we may never get one) and hardly compensate anything. If you haven't noticed, the more successful we are, the harder it gets even tho the opponents are the same. This is just stupid. This never is the case in any competition. All we get is salvage  of useless cards and lose more aether cards each round. We will have to fight generals with our 3 ups vs their 9 ups very soon (not to mention they are collecting relics while we are being forced to field 6). This is a punishment for being successfull. Another thing is that forcing suicide; Water may have to force suicide next round just because they have to field tons of decks and may not have quanta, why because they won 6-0 last round. They deserved that. The other possibility is that they intentionally lost to shrink their vault which also shows that being successful in your matches is a bad thing which feels very wrong.

[deuce22]

Letting the best team have  bye seems to be enough compensation.

No. Bye is very random (round 6, no bye. we may never get one) and hardly compensate anything. If you haven't noticed, the more successful we are, the harder it gets even tho the opponents are the same. This is just stupid. This never is the case in any competition. All we get is salvage  of useless cards and lose more aether cards each round. We will have to fight generals with our 3 ups vs their 9 ups very soon (not to mention they are collecting relics while we are being forced to field 6). This is a punishment for being successfull. Another thing is that forcing suicide; Water may have to force suicide next round just because they have to field tons of decks and may not have quanta, why because they won 6-0 last round. They deserved that. The other possibility is that they intentionally lost to shrink their vault which also shows that being successful in your matches is a bad thing which feels very wrong.

This has been an issue almost every war. While last war was awful regarding this issue, the roles this war help balance out the disadvantage top teams have. However, relics start to unbalance it again since bottom teams can get them and top teams can't. Again, I hate support teams, but this war is an improvement from last war (further improvement would be to just get rid of them entirely ).

And I don't remember stating it in previous S&F, but I support a larger conversion rate for quanta each round (if not unlimited). Water may have to do more than 1 suicide this round depending on how much quanta they saved from previous rounds.

[mrpaper]

Well if we are on things that doesn't feels right...
It seems weird to me that we are currently 6th for doing oki this was... yet, most of the teams behind us can't die this round while we can.  So either change the number of cards discarded when at the bottom (for more or less) or required decks to field.  What would seems the most logical to me that if you need to field 3 decks, you should have at least 111 cards to get 30 cards left and field at least a deck *111- 27x3= 30. 

[deuce22]

Well if we are on things that doesn't feels right...
It seems weird to me that we are currently 6th for doing oki this was... yet, most of the teams behind us can't die this round while we can.  So either change the number of cards discarded when at the bottom (for more or less) or required decks to field.  What would seems the most logical to me that if you need to field 3 decks, you should have at least 111 cards to get 30 cards left and field at least a deck *111- 27x3= 30.

However, if 1 of those teams wins, they will have under 70 cards for 2 duels. They will be hurting win or lose. This really only affects the final standings, which really means nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Personally, I think teams should be eliminated if they have less than 2 duels to play. It balances things A LOT more. No more sweet spot General, war is much shorter.

[glennfoo]

Support is not that powerful this time i think?? since relics is used permanetly not like last time . just my view though

[kev]

Although it's a tremendous burden on our poor Gdoc designers, I'd love to see spots in sdcp for all member roles.  Barring this, the Gdoc Manual could probably use an update on how such things should be handled.


Byes are given to top teams as a reward for their success in an event where there is some disincentive to be a top team.  Support byes should, imo, be given to bottom teams for the same reason.  A bye is a bad thing for Support cuz there's zero downside to losing.

[eaglgenes101]

To refine the suggestion from my round 6 post:
System now: Salvage 6 cards on a win (or something like that, I'm typing this from memory), discard a number of cards on a loss, which increases as War goes on. Teams have to field a certain number of team players each round depending on their number of cards.
My suggested system: Salvage 6 cards per win, discard 6 cards per win, both increase by 1 each turn. The bar for survival starts at 30 cards and increases by a certain number; this certain number is 20 and increases by two each time a round goes by that doesn't eliminate a team (Ties are determined by a seperate set of matches between tied teams). Teams can choose how many players to field.

(As long as the warmasters avoid injecting cards into the system, it should not have problems with time length.)

[ddevans96]

I think if you were in war, you'd see what the system we've refined for the last 6 wars is meant to do.

[Zso_Zso]

An idea that could even be implemented this war:

At the end of the war, Generals could submit an "evaluation" for all their team members, which would include a short text as well as a score of some kind, e.g. it could be something along the lines of the initial bidding system -- how many cards the player is worth in the eye of the General. These evaluation could help future generals in recruiting players in later wars. So in the next war application, participants could link their previous evaluations in the application form.