War #8 - Suggestions and Feedback

[Afdarenty]

For one War, let's allow poor masters to join any element they want. For god's sake, pls.

They can join any team they want, it's just that they have already chosen the team they'll be joining during trials.

[Drake_XIV]

I've always felt that people should join Trials and aim to be Master of an element if they have the intent of becoming General of that team. Or, at the very least participate in the respective team.

But the problem is that if a Master is mandated to participate in a team, that's one less member a team is using more cards to bet on, meaning they have a vault advantage and/or they have more spending power in bidding [depending on the rules of the War]. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Vangelios]

Even if a master have time or ability to join war however do not want, this ok for me. now master be soldier in your element is only pathetic and soldier in another element is abominable.

If really a master need be a general just put it in trials rules. and I'm already losing one loyalty point and probably some votes only because I don`t like of war current format and not will to join.

[Blacksmith]

I hope to see that a master that won't lead his element, won't be allowed to join war.

But it's totally unbearable that a master refuses to do it just because he doesn't feel able/confident to do it properly or because he wants to join a different team.

I quote that

A Master is usually a decorated and respected veteran player who knows a lot about Elements and is skillful in PvP.

A master represents his element within the community; joining the War as soldier in another element would be, to me, an insult to his element.

This is not relevant atm but anyway.
To become a good general you will need more than knowledge about elements and being a good pvp player. You will need leadership skill and you will need to spend more time( depending how active you use to be in war ). If one feels that someone else could do the leader role a lot better than you I don't think there is a problem if a master step aside for someone else more suitable. However this could be done informal.

[Avenger]

I also support that - I did poorly word that, apologies.

My issue is the idea of a Master applying for War and winding up on a different element's team.

but same element's team is possible? because is a way to save bids if this is possible

I would say, they should pay maximum price for their "master soldier" in that case.
I think the normal way would be to simply start as general, and be able to switch roles in the game every round.

[CCCombobreaker]

I also advocated a max bid General idea earlier, and maybe that will be implemented at some later time, as it seems it is not a pressing issue this war (as it has been in past wars).

Maybe this wasn't the point of your post Avenger, but I sort of felt I should respond to it anyways.

I think the normal way would be to simply start as general, and be able to switch roles in the game every round.

Spoiler for passionate plea for the culture of EtG:

I think switching roles makes them significantly less meaningful.  For example, in War 4, being the lieutenant was a position of respect and authority on the team, whereas last war, it was whoever you wanted to get 3 additional upgrades.  Saying "I was a lieutenant in War 8" is a near meaningless statement as any player on any team could be a lieutenant just because they were assigned a deck with 6 upgrades for their match-up, whereas "I was a Lieutenant in War 4" reflects a responsibility and value you were assigned by your General for your team.  The rules used to include "the lieutenant can act in place of the General whenever the General is not available" which meant the lieutenant should be a person capable of handling all the General's duties (event cards, vault submission, working out issues with the WMs, etc) any time the General was unavailable.  I think that added a lot to the event.

It added prestige and lore/depth/mood/environment to the event that has been slowly disintegrating over time.  War is a central thematic event of the elements community, and it is important that it carries this aura/lore/mood instead of becoming just some other PvP event.  The historical importance of many community figures is tied their title and exploits in War, and undermining the titles makes creating new history or relating to the existing history much more difficult, which robs the community of a great source of cohesion and excitement.

I am grateful that it appears (per what I saw in the now removed rules) the WMs are reversing the trend by re-establishing a permanent lieutenant position.  But even if they will continue allowing teams to swap lieutenant position each round, I would definitely recommend against also allowing this for title of General, a position that in most cases has to be earned, and in other cases, appointed with serious consideration to those who have been determined capable of the responsibility.

The lore and history we have created over time around ourselves and former members is a unique and compelling aspect of this community.  I think steps should be taken to accentuate and preserve that instead of undermine it, and how War is viewed and treated will ultimately foster this creativity or push it all to the fringes and leave us with just "matches to be played with different rules". 

[SpikeSpiegel]

Why, so far, I'm totally disappointed by War #8:

- Vaults rules are the same of past Wars. I was hoping in something different and new but it's barely a copy of past wars. Just take a look to war archive:

Spoiler for Quote from a random war...mmh...#3:

Vault building rules:
- at least 50% of cards have to be from your element
- maximum of 24 per card from your element (restriction doesn't apply to Pillars or Pendulums)
- maximum of 12 per card from other elements (restriction doesn't apply to Pillars or Pendulums)
- no Shards

- Deckbuilding rules are the same of past Wars. I was hoping in something different and new, considering that last wars rules rules have clearly benefited an element in itself already very strong ( ). Unfortunately, even in this War the meta will be the same. And no, a different number of upgraded cards won't change nothing. Again, just check war archive:

Spoiler for Quote from a random war...mmh...#5:

Deckbuilding rules:
- Any mark
- At least 50% of your cards have to be from your element
- Generals can use up to 6 upgraded cards plus one per Relic the team possesses (unupgraded cards taken from the Vault are transformed into upgraded ones)
- Lieutenants can use up to 3 upgraded cards plus one per Relic the team possesses (unupgraded cards taken from the Vault are transformed into upgraded ones)
- Other players can use up to one upgraded cards per Relic the team possesses (unupgraded cards taken from the Vault are transformed into upgraded ones)
- You cannot change your deck until the round is over
 
Conversion Rule Teams have the option to convert some of their cards.  This means that they can replace any card in their Vault with a Pillar or a Pendulum of their element.  Converting helps teams to avoid a situation where they would be otherwise forced to build "suicide" decks.  Converting will be done by the Strategist using the Google doc.  Teams can convert a maximum of 24 cards per round.
 
Illegal Deck Rule
If teams write "Y" in the “Planned Suicide” row for their illegal deck they will automatically forfeit the match, BUT don't take the 3 card penalty for building an illegal deck.  By adding "illegal", teams show that they knowingly built an illegal deck, and can prevent a situation where they would be forced to take a double penalty (both discarding because of a loss and a card penalty) for not being able to b

- War auctions are totally not regulated, with the result of a big mess. Someone has used the old template, someone else just wrote his IGN, another one IGN + WOOAAARR!!!!, etc...
I've asked two different WM's why they didn't use a template for auctions:
- Answer one: I don't see the problem.
- Answer two: We decided to not use it, so people can choose what info to provide. If there's more information that you want to know from someone, you can ask in their application topic.

Duh. But War auctions should provide info, above all when we have a drafting system like the current one. Moreover I see this as a big lack in organizing.


I don't know. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I'm really disappointed.

[Vangelios]

Besides favoring one element, we now have more easy codes for this element (not that I'm against codes marks in war but if an element can be more easier these codes are clearly unjust) but I like of the rule of more upgraded and 420 cards, can change some metas.

[deuce22]

Why, so far, I'm totally disappointed by War #8:

Spoiler for Hidden:

- Vaults rules are the same of past Wars. I was hoping in something different and new but it's barely a copy of past wars. Just take a look to war archive:

Spoiler for Quote from a random war...mmh...#3:

Vault building rules:
- at least 50% of cards have to be from your element
- maximum of 24 per card from your element (restriction doesn't apply to Pillars or Pendulums)
- maximum of 12 per card from other elements (restriction doesn't apply to Pillars or Pendulums)
- no Shards

- Deckbuilding rules are the same of past Wars. I was hoping in something different and new, considering that last wars rules rules have clearly benefited an element in itself already very strong ( ). Unfortunately, even in this War the meta will be the same. And no, a different number of upgraded cards won't change nothing. Again, just check war archive:

Spoiler for Quote from a random war...mmh...#5:

Deckbuilding rules:
- Any mark
- At least 50% of your cards have to be from your element
- Generals can use up to 6 upgraded cards plus one per Relic the team possesses (unupgraded cards taken from the Vault are transformed into upgraded ones)
- Lieutenants can use up to 3 upgraded cards plus one per Relic the team possesses (unupgraded cards taken from the Vault are transformed into upgraded ones)
- Other players can use up to one upgraded cards per Relic the team possesses (unupgraded cards taken from the Vault are transformed into upgraded ones)
- You cannot change your deck until the round is over
 
Conversion Rule Teams have the option to convert some of their cards.  This means that they can replace any card in their Vault with a Pillar or a Pendulum of their element.  Converting helps teams to avoid a situation where they would be otherwise forced to build "suicide" decks.  Converting will be done by the Strategist using the Google doc.  Teams can convert a maximum of 24 cards per round.
 
Illegal Deck Rule
If teams write "Y" in the “Planned Suicide” row for their illegal deck they will automatically forfeit the match, BUT don't take the 3 card penalty for building an illegal deck.  By adding "illegal", teams show that they knowingly built an illegal deck, and can prevent a situation where they would be forced to take a double penalty (both discarding because of a loss and a card penalty) for not being able to b

- War auctions are totally not regulated, with the result of a big mess. Someone has used the old template, someone else just wrote his IGN, another one IGN + WOOAAARR!!!!, etc...
I've asked two different WM's why they didn't use a template for auctions:
- Answer one: I don't see the problem.
- Answer two: We decided to not use it, so people can choose what info to provide. If there's more information that you want to know from someone, you can ask in their application topic.

Duh. But War auctions should provide info, above all when we have a drafting system like the current one. Moreover I see this as a big lack in organizing.


I don't know. Maybe my expectations were too high, but I'm really disappointed.
.

I'm sorry to hear you are disappointed in the war rules, but let me see if I can clarify some points.

1. The vault is one of the things that make war separate from other events. You suggested last war to essentially make vaults like the Sacrifice event. As far as I'm concerned, the vaults will likely stay very similar to previous wars. The vault size and building rules may slightly change depending on war rules, but vaults will be vaults. Only you and Vangelios have expressed dislike over the vault system last war. I understand that not everyone is going to like this system, and therefore not everyone is going to like war.

2. Deckbuilding has never really changed very much from war to war. Even in your suggested rules after last war, your deck building rules were more or less the same, with one difference that was basically tied to your vault rules. These are also the same rules that were used when wars were won by fire, entropy, and death. Suggesting that aether has won because of these rules completely discredits my teams accomplishments these past 3 wars. I think it also discredits the teams that worked very hard and barely lost. I can assure you, aether did not win because of the deckbuilding rules. In all 3 wars, we got lucky late in war, which determined whether we went on to win or lose those wars. And while you may not believe that the increase in upgrades is going to change much, I think it is going to significantly change the meta. Yes, there will be a lot of the usual decks, but the dynamics of war will change pretty significantly. Other than me being personally offended by this feedback, I think we can agree to disagree regarding the meta change. I will note that a number of generals have mentioned in chat that they believe the new deckbuilding rules will change things quite a bit.

3. With regards to applications, we WMs had a lengthy discussion on whether or not to include a common application template. From a General's perspective, I can definitely appreciate your concerns. However, with having essentially an open application, this also provides Generals with a lot more information that previous templates did not provide. What someone writes in their app may be an indication of what they will be like as a teammate. Also, this encourages generals to communicate with applicants either via PM or in a reply to the application itself. This is a new change, and not all changes necessarily make things better despite their best intentions. So, thank you for your feedback regarding this topic. If others have concerns, I encourage people to support spike's feelings so that changes can be made for next war. There will be no changes regarding the current application process.

[dawn to dusk]

I can't edit posts in the war auction board

Wat

[deuce22]

I can't edit posts in the war auction board

Wat

This was in place for previous auctions so that bids could not be changed. Will discuss with WMs and see if we can open this up.

[Dm]

3. With regards to applications, we WMs had a lengthy discussion on whether or not to include a common application template. From a General's perspective, I can definitely appreciate your concerns. However, with having essentially an open application, this also provides Generals with a lot more information that previous templates did not provide. What someone writes in their app may be an indication of what they will be like as a teammate. Also, this encourages generals to communicate with applicants either via PM or in a reply to the application itself. This is a new change, and not all changes necessarily make things better despite their best intentions. So, thank you for your feedback regarding this topic. If others have concerns, I encourage people to support spike's feelings so that changes can be made for next war. There will be no changes regarding the current application process.

This falls more or less with what I supposed we'd get as a response. My reply to this is that you WM's can still place the template as a suggestion in the Sticky in War Auction board. Newer Players (or even older players) may have a hard time finding such a template to place all their cards and what-not. Maybe some new players do want to do it but simply don't have the tools to. Don't make it obligatory, but I think that having the template available as a suggestion in the sticky would be very good.