Post by: CuCN on September 05, 2014, 01:16:07 pm
Please post suggestions and feedback regarding War #8 in this thread for War #9's benefit
Post by: serprex on September 14, 2014, 02:43:03 pm
Post by: andretimpa on September 14, 2014, 02:47:46 pm
Post by: ddevans96 on September 15, 2014, 08:15:38 am
War Archive is a mess. Every War should get a subboard in the War Archive subboard
I dunno, I kind of like being one of the only people who can navigate it :P
Post by: Drake_XIV on September 15, 2014, 08:22:48 am
I still have access to the :time board
Same here for :water
Post by: ddevans96 on September 15, 2014, 08:27:16 am
(WMs, if you want me to shut up, I will)
Post by: Blacksmith on September 15, 2014, 08:37:32 am
To prevent the amount of unactive people.
Post by: Submachine on September 15, 2014, 10:16:15 am
How about assign the people who aren't picked in a draft/auction to be subs for a certain team if any player goes inactive?Maybe re-enact the activity of STANDIN?
To prevent the amount of unactive people.
Post by: Zso_Zso on September 15, 2014, 04:07:28 pm
Maybe re-enact the activity of STANDIN?
Oh, no! :o
Then, STANDIN would win the War single-handedly, we can't have that >:(
Post by: Calindu on September 15, 2014, 05:57:50 pm
Post by: dawn to dusk on September 15, 2014, 09:00:40 pm
Life > STANDINMaybe re-enact the activity of STANDIN?
Oh, no! :o
Then, STANDIN would win the War single-handedly, we can't have that >:(
if you don't try to kill life, life shall win
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on September 16, 2014, 08:38:36 am
Life > STANDIN
Post by: Blacksmith on September 16, 2014, 09:05:05 pm
Post by: Vangelios on September 16, 2014, 09:18:50 pm
Post by: ddevans96 on September 16, 2014, 09:24:45 pm
How come masters who decides not to be generals aren't allowed to enter war?
Because if you don't want to lead the element you chose to represent, then why should you be in War at all?
Elemental allegiance should mean something.
Post by: Vangelios on September 16, 2014, 09:31:44 pm
Exactly, I'm not going to represent fire because I don't like of the war format, however I'm very still faithful to my element.How come masters who decides not to be generals aren't allowed to enter war?
Because if you don't want to lead the element you chose to represent, then why should you be in War at all?
Elemental allegiance should mean something.
Post by: theelkspeaks on September 16, 2014, 09:46:39 pm
How come masters who decides not to be generals aren't allowed to enter war?
Because if you don't want to lead the element you chose to represent, then why should you be in War at all?
Elemental allegiance should mean something.
I, for one, am ok with a Master who doesn't feel as though he/she is competent enough or experienced enough to General choosing to nominate one of the players they draft as General, at any time after they have drafted that player. (Most likely their first pick). I think there's widespread support for that option.
Post by: ddevans96 on September 16, 2014, 10:23:00 pm
My issue is the idea of a Master applying for War and winding up on a different element's team.
Post by: Vangelios on September 16, 2014, 10:56:11 pm
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
Post by: CCCombobreaker on September 17, 2014, 12:05:35 am
Quote
As Trials is coming into it's FINAL stage, and Masters will soon be decided, I felt it important that we renew the discussion from last War that ended with several Masters sitting out War entirely. As of last War, it was ruled Masters who do not General cannot participate in War (although this was not formally added to the rules?)Quote from: WAR RULESWar will have 12 Generals, one for each element. Masters are the Generals of their element by default. If a Master is unable to join War, he or she will appoint a replacement General (Sr. Member or above). If one or more elements don't have a Master, a General will be picked by the Council.
I think that their are 2 major points of view in this discussion.
1) We need as many quality players in War as possible, so we shouldn't exclude Masters who don't want to be General from the event.
2) Being General of your element is one of the primary responsibilities of being a Master, it is abhorrent for a Master of one element to be a soldier on another element's team in War.
There was a lot of discussion and arguing between these two points of view, and the final decision to completely ignore point 1) (and perhaps also the arguing) generally left everyone feeling bad about what happened. My first warning is that feeling bad about what happened to Marsu (and also justaburd to a lesser extend) is not a good reason to move directly from point 2) to point 1).
Last War I would say I was pretty squarely in camp 2, as War feels like the biggest event in Elements (to me) and so Masters (the face of an element) should not be abandoning their element and fighting for another. You got to choose which Element you were Master of, you should not take that lightly. As TrO I understand people have their own reasons for choosing the Elements they do Trials for, but ultimately you should know that there is a prestige and responsibility with the position of Master (should you win that title) and you ought to do your best to fulfill those responsibilities.
However, since last war (and in organizing Trials), there is quite a bit to be said for point 1). We do need as many quality people in our "premier" events as possible, and excluding people on technicalities that would otherwise participate is wasteful and causes unnecessary tension. So I am proposing a couple of reasonable compromises to handle the situation. I am not a WM, and ultimately it falls on the WMs to make the decision they feel is best for War. But I felt very strongly I should share these so that they will at least be considered, as I know you are making changes to the event at a number of levels.
There have been hints and whispers of the Auction being turned into a Draft. So I will try to explain my possibilities in terms that apply to either a draft or an auction. I will also note that these solutions are not as simple as "they can't join" or "they can join", this is because I believe there should be some cost associated with being Master but not General. Also my possibilities all maintain that the non-General Master remains on their Elements team for War. I understand not feeling ready to be General, or not having time to commit to being General, but if you can participate in War, you can be on the team you are Master of. There is no compelling reason you can be in War but not on the team you represent as Master.
Possibilities:
A) Masters have an opportunity before the draft/auction to step down from being General and appoint a General in their place (as before).
That Master may then enter the draft/auction but is (1) unavailable to all other teams and can only be obtained in the first round or at maximum cost OR (2) must be drafted by their team in the first round or purchased by their own team immediately at the maximum cost.
-The downsides here is Masters can use the rule to essentially lock in a "first pick" (even at max cost) by designating them the General. It would need to be worded in such a way that players being appointed General have the option to say "NO", and this may cause some timing and complexity issues. Also A(1) means that a Master who appoints a General might sit out War if the General they appointed does not select them. While this feels very unlikely for a number of reasons, it could be a point of contention. A(2) is a little more uncomfortable in a draft, as it feels like they are being forced to "use their first pick" on the Master. But I would point out that this is not meaningfully different than if the General was the (max cost)/(first pick). And I would expect that will be reasonable, as players who are capable of being General should go in the first round of a draft or receive max bids in an auction.
-The upsides are Masters can participate in War as non-Generals. They remain in their own element. It has a minimal impact on the other elements. And it is not terribly complex. A non general master A(1) must ban all other elements and if selected by their element, it must be done in the first round (or if bid on by their element must receive a maximum bid) or B(1) must be selected by their element in the first round (or must receive a maximum bid from their element's general). These can be established by very clear and concise rules.
B) Masters have an opportunity before the draft/auction to step down from being General and appoint a General in their place (as before). If they do so, they cannot participate in War.
However, if a Master puts a maximum bid on a player or uses their first round draft pick on a player, and that player consents, the title of General is passed to that player effective immediately. That player will then continue the draft/auction as the General, and the Master will remain on that Element's team.
-This solution is very similar to the first with a few differences.
a) It places a clearly emphasis on the player receiving the General title's willingness to accept the title.
b) It removes the possibility of a Master appointing a General and then the General not selecting the Master to join there team (and thus the Master not participating in War).
c) Masters have to decide to participate in War or sit it out before the auction/draft, but if they choose to participate, they have some time after that to determine and reach an agreement with who their General will be.
I feel I have not entirely detailed either solution as it would need to be as rules of the event, but I hope they can serve as ideas the WMs can build upon to find a meaningful way to let Masters who don't want to General (for whatever reason) to participate in War, but remain on the team of the Element of which they are Master.
Also I feel it is important to start giving this topic serious consideration now, as I think this could easily be classified as one of the worst handled issues during last war.
*this post is subject to minor clarification updates, as I will likely reread it several times and find things I feel are worded poorly*
Also I believe that the WMs gave this issue some serious consideration before arriving at their current ruling, so I would not expect it to change this war.
Post by: SpikeSpiegel on September 17, 2014, 06:05:24 am
I hope to see that a master that won't lead his element, won't be allowed to join war.
I understand if, because of real life committents, a master decides to not lead his element; I understand less that a master decides to not lead his element because he has no desire to join War: in that case he shouldn't joined Trials (or defended his title). 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
Quote
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.
Post by: RootRanger on September 17, 2014, 06:24:09 am
As for joining War as a soldier - that just doesn't make any sense.
Post by: dawn to dusk on September 17, 2014, 07:22:47 am
If that same master joins that team as a soldier, I ask them if they're fit to lead that element in other events.
If that master joins another element, they are a disgrace to the element they are master of.
Though I do feel that, whether or not they join war, they should make people know that that is their element. Make them take into consideration that they will use that deck, regardless of the meta. That is what makes a master.
Imo of course
Post by: Submachine on September 17, 2014, 07:56:41 am
Post by: Afdarenty on September 17, 2014, 07:59:11 am
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. :)
Post by: Drake_XIV on September 17, 2014, 08:03:19 am
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.
Post by: Vangelios on September 17, 2014, 12:16:18 pm
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.
Post by: Blacksmith on September 17, 2014, 04:06:22 pm
This is not relevant atm but anyway.
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 thatQuoteA 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.
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.
Post by: Avenger on September 17, 2014, 06:57:05 pm
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.
Post by: CCCombobreaker on September 17, 2014, 08:49:13 pm
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.
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".
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".
Post by: SpikeSpiegel on September 19, 2014, 04:25:54 am
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:
Quote
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 ( :aether ). 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:
Quote
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.
Post by: Vangelios on September 19, 2014, 04:52:50 am
Post by: deuce22 on September 19, 2014, 11:26:15 am
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:QuoteVault 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 ( :aether ). 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:QuoteDeckbuilding 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.
Post by: dawn to dusk on September 19, 2014, 11:27:25 am
Wat
Post by: deuce22 on September 19, 2014, 11:31:35 am
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.
Post by: Dm on September 19, 2014, 11:34:34 am
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.
Post by: SpikeSpiegel on September 19, 2014, 12:10:12 pm
@ Deuce: I don't want to start a discussion about War, what I wrote it's just my opinion.
But:
1. I never suggested to use Sacrifice vault rules; I said that we could take inspiration by that kind of vaults.
2. Aether is probably the most balanced element, with several powerful cards; now, not intended to discredit previous aether teams, and if someone is offended can come to me to clarify. But, and it's my opinion, with cards like dim shield, fractal, etc... deckbuilding war rules are a slight advantage for aether. I can explain it better via PM if someone is interested.
3. I'm sorry, but here you failed. I understand your intent to make Generals communicating with applicants, and it would have been perfect with a different auction system; with the current draft, auctions should be the fullest possible. Moreover, the mess here is highlighted by the fact that two different WM's gave me two different answers.
As someone said time ago, in this community there's a lack of innovators; this was the perfect chance to renew War, above all after that disastrous #7. But I guess I've to wait a little bit more to see something new.
Fine to me.
Post by: Vangelios on September 19, 2014, 12:11:52 pm
well actually I can tolerate the current vault system (although I think it could be a "free vault")
what really makes me mad is the fact of not being able to change the deck during the duel. Make that each player go to the duel with at least 2 decks instead of only 1.
and also I suggest a pool to war as Higurashi did to shards, will help get a better sense of how the community feels the war.
Post by: deuce22 on September 19, 2014, 12:32:05 pm
With regards to lack of innovation, this is an established event that requires small changes from war to war, not complete renovation. And war 7 was not a "disaster" because of vaults or deckbuilding rules. This would imply that all wars have been a disaster.
Thank you for your feedback. Good luck to you and your team this war.
Post by: Vangelios on September 21, 2014, 02:32:14 pm
Post by: deuce22 on September 21, 2014, 04:00:54 pm
Why I cannot to post in propaganda? >:(
post or comment?
Post by: Vangelios on September 21, 2014, 04:14:50 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/Z93Vyqh.png)
Post by: deuce22 on September 21, 2014, 04:35:28 pm
Update: WMs dont have control over access to propaganda. I have no idea why you cant post anything there. I would take it up with Higs.
Post by: Vangelios on September 21, 2014, 04:48:16 pm
Post by: rem4life on October 04, 2014, 02:29:53 am
Post by: dawn to dusk on October 04, 2014, 06:24:55 am
Post by: Vangelios on October 08, 2014, 01:01:41 am
However the idea of sub is interesting.
Post by: Zso_Zso on October 08, 2014, 02:38:35 am
WMs, please post them.
Post by: hainkarga on October 08, 2014, 02:42:00 am
It would be interesting to see all the drafting lists of all Generals for each round, now that the draft is over.
WMs, please post them.
Although i believe i had amusing Draft PMs. No need to make them public. Drama.
Post by: CuCN on October 08, 2014, 02:43:36 am
It would be interesting to see all the drafting lists of all Generals for each round, now that the draft is over.No draft lists will be posted unless the generals give their approval.
WMs, please post them.
Post by: UTAlan on October 08, 2014, 03:13:37 am
It would be interesting to see all the drafting lists of all Generals for each round, now that the draft is over.No draft lists will be posted unless the generals give their approval.
WMs, please post them.
I'm not a general, but I approve of this ruling.
Post by: serprex on October 08, 2014, 03:16:05 am
Post by: hainkarga on October 08, 2014, 03:42:09 am
Haink should reveal his patch notes, if not his rankings. Then from there people can try to reconstruct his rankings
Sure why not. Here are most of them. Also some gifs were involved.
Subject: Aether Draft Round 1 List
Higurashi for 40 cards. Thank you.
Subject: Aether Draft Round 2 List (V2.0)
V2.0 Patch notes:
Subject: Aether Draft Round 3 List (V2.0)
V2.0 Patch Notes
Subject: Aether Draft Round 4 List (V1.0)
Newest Release Features
Aether Draft Round 4 List (V1.1)
Patch Notes for Release V1.1
Subject: Aether Draft Round 4 List (V1.2)
Patch Notes for Release V1.2
Subject: Aether Draft Round 5 List (V1.0)
Newest Release Features
Subject: Aether Draft Round 5 List (V1.1)
Patch Notes V1.1
Subject: Aether Draft Round 5 List (V1.2)
Patch Notes V1.2
Sent this gif along with the list when i thought we'd likely get DM.
(http://i.imgur.com/Nh5VwmH.gif)
Higurashi for 40 cards. Thank you.
Subject: Aether Draft Round 2 List (V2.0)
V2.0 Patch notes:
- Switching positions of RR & Kaker.
- Fixed a bug where position 8 is a smiley
Subject: Aether Draft Round 3 List (V2.0)
V2.0 Patch Notes
- Major Changes in Design Concepts
- Fixed a Bug in Low Bid Amount. Increased to 8
- Now Comes with an Upgraded Laxadarap
- For More Information Contact: hainkarga
Subject: Aether Draft Round 4 List (V1.0)
Newest Release Features
- Bestowing Trust upon a Promising Newbies. theelkspeaks at top and veterans pushed below
- More Cautious Bid Amount: 4
- DM1321 as Official Aether Mascot
- Chance for an Aether Loyalist: Zawadx
- For Appreciation and Hate Mail, Contact: hainkarga
Aether Draft Round 4 List (V1.1)
Patch Notes for Release V1.1
- Jumbled the Rankings While Staying Loyal to The Round 4 Concept
- Chance for an Aether Loyalist: Zawadx
- Misuse of Plurality in Previous Version Feature Notes (a promising newbies)
- For Kinky & Nasty Propositions, Contact: hainkarga
Subject: Aether Draft Round 4 List (V1.2)
Patch Notes for Release V1.2
- Bottom Half Modifications
Subject: Aether Draft Round 5 List (V1.0)
Newest Release Features
- Full Overhaul of Available Candidate Base
- Including Good Natured Newbies For Butterflies And Rainbows
- Schopenhauerian Bid Amount: 2
- In Case of Nuclear Attack or Alien Invasion, Contact: hainkarga
Subject: Aether Draft Round 5 List (V1.1)
Patch Notes V1.1
- iancudorinmarian, qwerter moved up.
- rogerluc in List
- Look at the Mirror And Say My Name Thrice, or Send PM to: hainkarga
Subject: Aether Draft Round 5 List (V1.2)
Patch Notes V1.2
- Due to Mysterious Candidates, Major Dispute Over The List
- Appreciated War Masters in Alphabetical Order
- For Mongolian Invasion Needs, Contact to: hainkarga
Sent this gif along with the list when i thought we'd likely get DM.
(http://i.imgur.com/Nh5VwmH.gif)
Post by: ddevans96 on October 08, 2014, 03:59:30 am
Post by: RootRanger on October 08, 2014, 04:59:15 am
Post by: Submachine on October 08, 2014, 09:43:41 am
Post by: deuce22 on October 08, 2014, 07:15:11 pm
Can I just say the hate mail publicly?
Depends. As long as it is constructive, then by all means let the hate flow.
Post by: andretimpa on October 08, 2014, 09:02:46 pm
It would be interesting to see all the drafting lists of all Generals for each round, now that the draft is over.
WMs, please post them.
Although i believe i had amusing Draft PMs. No need to make them public. Drama.
But what would war be without drama?
Post by: SpikeSpiegel on October 08, 2014, 11:53:14 pm
Annoying member: "Spike, why you bid 1 card in each round? Who was in your lists?"
The number of cards in your vault can be considered as the HP's of your team. Many cards allow to a more flexibility, you can build more decks, you can use many combos and buildings, etc.
This was my main goal.
Now, we had many worthy apps and I won't naming ALL names, of course; said that, it was possible to grap a player using just 1 card? Since each master had to fill a 12 names list, yes.
First round: all players available. There are at least 12 strong players with no bans? Yes. Then why spending 40 cards when I can grab one of them using 1 card?
Kuro was my first choice because is an active player, skilled in PvP, a :time lover, his :time knowledge is equal to mine, he's experienced, etc...
PS: submachine is written twice cuz i derped in the copy/paste. But with all players available, I didn't risked to "burn a round".
Second round: there are still many players left. Moreover, a large part of my first round list is still available. I can fill a 12 names list of strong players with no bans? Again, yes.
pwconfirm as first choice because he's showing to be an excellent player (I say it now: he'll become one of the strongest PvPer around); moreover I was pretty sure no one would have had him in top picks in 2nd round.
Third round: players start to run low. Going ahead with rounds, the chance to have a the player you want with 1 cards is reduced more and more. But there are still many worthy players, and I still can use names from my previous lists...
In this round I was pretty sure to go in the second half of my list for a draft, so I tried and crossed fingers. Fate brought me Dani, that was already in my first round list. Probably it couldn't have gone better.
Fourth round: players are few. Moreover, other Masters are dealing with the expenses of the previous rounds and they are optimizing their bids. Using 1 card is impossible to aim properly to a target, so I've to use an homogeneous list and I've to cross fingers, again.
Predictable, but again I obtained a player that was in my previous list. Propheon has already shown to be a very good player, so another lucky shot for me.
Fifth and last round: almost no players left. Remaining ones are newbies or little known players. As I said in chat, the main points of this rounds are score and cards; INB4, I know well that the score isn't a reliable value to define a player's skill, but at low scores it can considered as a gross indication of the experience/skill of a player. Bidding 1 card in this round it means to risk, you can find yourself with an inactive member in your team.
Except few names, I don't know the most of them. But now that I talked with furkannnO, I can say I've been lucky even in this final round.
This was my main goal.
Now, we had many worthy apps and I won't naming ALL names, of course; said that, it was possible to grap a player using just 1 card? Since each master had to fill a 12 names list, yes.
First round: all players available. There are at least 12 strong players with no bans? Yes. Then why spending 40 cards when I can grab one of them using 1 card?
Quote
Kuroaitou
dragonsdemesne
RavingRabbid
Vagman13
Submachine
dark ripper
Avenger
majofa
Acsabi
UTAlan
Submachine
DANIEELA
Kuro was my first choice because is an active player, skilled in PvP, a :time lover, his :time knowledge is equal to mine, he's experienced, etc...
PS: submachine is written twice cuz i derped in the copy/paste. But with all players available, I didn't risked to "burn a round".
Second round: there are still many players left. Moreover, a large part of my first round list is still available. I can fill a 12 names list of strong players with no bans? Again, yes.
Quote
pwconfirm
RavingRabbid
worldwideweb3
dark ripper
Vagman13
Avenger
Acsabi
UTAlan
Submachine
Dm1321
Rutarete
Spielkind
pwconfirm as first choice because he's showing to be an excellent player (I say it now: he'll become one of the strongest PvPer around); moreover I was pretty sure no one would have had him in top picks in 2nd round.
Third round: players start to run low. Going ahead with rounds, the chance to have a the player you want with 1 cards is reduced more and more. But there are still many worthy players, and I still can use names from my previous lists...
Quote
worldwideweb3
Vagman13
dark ripper
DANIEELA
bripod
rem4life
Submachine
Dm1321
andretimpa
Rutarete
propheon
iancudorinmarian
In this round I was pretty sure to go in the second half of my list for a draft, so I tried and crossed fingers. Fate brought me Dani, that was already in my first round list. Probably it couldn't have gone better.
Fourth round: players are few. Moreover, other Masters are dealing with the expenses of the previous rounds and they are optimizing their bids. Using 1 card is impossible to aim properly to a target, so I've to use an homogeneous list and I've to cross fingers, again.
Quote
rem4life
bripod
Dm1321
andretimpa
propheon
iancudorinmarian
Ginyu
Brusterix
qwerter
eljoemo
Drake_XIV
Scaramanga
Predictable, but again I obtained a player that was in my previous list. Propheon has already shown to be a very good player, so another lucky shot for me.
Fifth and last round: almost no players left. Remaining ones are newbies or little known players. As I said in chat, the main points of this rounds are score and cards; INB4, I know well that the score isn't a reliable value to define a player's skill, but at low scores it can considered as a gross indication of the experience/skill of a player. Bidding 1 card in this round it means to risk, you can find yourself with an inactive member in your team.
Quote
Brusterix
Iancudorinmarian
Rogerluc
Ginyu
qwerter
Shinki12345
eljoemo
furkannnO
farscape
Lifehatelove
Kylie_Lynn97
schmendrick
Except few names, I don't know the most of them. But now that I talked with furkannnO, I can say I've been lucky even in this final round.
Post by: ddevans96 on October 08, 2014, 11:57:44 pm
Post by: Submachine on October 09, 2014, 12:02:42 am
I like it. :)
Post by: rob77dp on October 14, 2014, 03:38:50 pm
1 - In the Vault tool, create a "Deck Maker" with dropdown lists to only show cards that the team has in the vault and a "Quantity" column that restricts input to legal card counts for the deck.
*This would provide another layer of illegal-deck-checking to the process and be really super cool. :)
EDIT: Revised after CuCN's comments, below, about reasons for tool functions I had suggested to change.
Post by: CuCN on October 14, 2014, 06:32:20 pm
Suggestions:
1 - In the Vault tool, set the "Deck Code Generator" tab's "Card" dropdown lists to only show cards that the team has in the vault.
*This would make the Vault tool's deck code generator function more appealing (to me at least) since it would provide another layer of illegal-deck-checking to the process.
2 - In the Vault tool, set the "Deck Code Generator" tab's "Quantity" column's cells to only allow input of card quantities which the vault can legally provide of that row's selected card.
*This would make the Vault tool's deck code generator function more appealing (to me at least) since it would provide another layer of illegal-deck-checking to the process.
The Deck Code Generator can also be used for making Salvage deck codes, which can contain cards that aren't in the vault.
Post by: rob77dp on October 14, 2014, 06:44:25 pm
Suggestions:
1 - In the Vault tool, set the "Deck Code Generator" tab's "Card" dropdown lists to only show cards that the team has in the vault.
*This would make the Vault tool's deck code generator function more appealing (to me at least) since it would provide another layer of illegal-deck-checking to the process.
2 - In the Vault tool, set the "Deck Code Generator" tab's "Quantity" column's cells to only allow input of card quantities which the vault can legally provide of that row's selected card.
*This would make the Vault tool's deck code generator function more appealing (to me at least) since it would provide another layer of illegal-deck-checking to the process.
The Deck Code Generator can also be used for making Salvage deck codes, which can contain cards that aren't in the vault.
Edited my post to not suggest interference with intentional functions of the tool. :)
Post by: serprex on November 05, 2014, 11:12:43 pm
Post by: Ginyu on November 11, 2014, 12:54:51 pm
Post by: CuCN on November 11, 2014, 01:39:13 pm
The rounds are set on a weekly schedule so that the duel phase is over the weekend when people have the most time to play matches, and also matches up to the times WMs are available to post. Delaying the round by an amount of time less than a week would throw that off.
Post by: Blacksmith on November 11, 2014, 04:11:07 pm
Getting the information (including people creating accounts if they don't have one already) and then editing the permissions on the vaults accordingly takes a significant amount of time.Why not just post thins now and give people more time with deck building ?
The rounds are set on a weekly schedule so that the duel phase is over the weekend when people have the most time to play matches, and also matches up to the times WMs are available to post. Delaying the round by an amount of time less than a week would throw that off.
Post by: theelkspeaks on November 11, 2014, 04:19:31 pm
WMs should maintain match results through an embedded spreadsheet à la Kakerstats (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xUr8zxy-EzKNe_rJDOej6gPAId7wa5J6hHFA-OcuaFI/edit#gid=150429968) for match results, not some BBcode mess
I actually really like the look of the BBCode round results; they definitely have their benefits too.
Post by: mrpaper on November 11, 2014, 05:38:31 pm
I would also be more then glad to have 10 days of deckbuilding!Getting the information (including people creating accounts if they don't have one already) and then editing the permissions on the vaults accordingly takes a significant amount of time.Why not just post thins now and give people more time with deck building ?
The rounds are set on a weekly schedule so that the duel phase is over the weekend when people have the most time to play matches, and also matches up to the times WMs are available to post. Delaying the round by an amount of time less than a week would throw that off.
Post by: Ginyu on November 11, 2014, 05:58:34 pm
I would also be more then glad to have 10 days of deckbuilding!
Me, too!
Post by: Odii Odsen on November 11, 2014, 06:03:35 pm
I would also be more then glad to have 10 days of deckbuilding!
Me, too!
We, Team Darkness, agree.
Post by: Vangelios on November 11, 2014, 11:09:18 pm
4 days are great. The ideal is 1 round per week, not 3 rounds per month
Post by: UTAlan on November 11, 2014, 11:25:22 pm
10 days to create a deck that will be hard countered? to die slowly eh?
4 days are great. The ideal is 1 round per week, not 3 rounds per month
In my mind it's not about having more time to prepare, but having something to do over the next week.
Post by: Vangelios on November 11, 2014, 11:38:03 pm
if are 10 days in deck-building. 3 will be to play, just 2 rounds per month
will be a long event, so it might happen dropouts with higher frequencies than normal.
Post by: serprex on November 11, 2014, 11:46:30 pm
Why is round 5 delayed by a whole week? Sending account names won't need that much time...
The discussion that sprouted from this should've taken place in GD (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/war/war-8-general-discussion)
Post by: UTAlan on November 12, 2014, 12:18:09 am
Well have some who really have problems with time I agree, but most will leave to last moments anyway.
if are 10 days in deck-building. 3 will be to play, just 2 rounds per month
will be a long event, so it might happen dropouts with higher frequencies than normal.
Not a suggestion to change every round's deckbuilding to 10 days, just this round (since we're gonna be sitting around doing nothing for the next 6 days anyway).
Post by: serprex on December 06, 2014, 07:40:30 pm
Post by: Vangelios on December 08, 2014, 10:25:25 pm
I believe this icon is very valid now, because not be nornal one Gen do a bid of 40 cards.
Post by: mrpaper on December 10, 2014, 04:19:39 am
What happened with icon "Most expensive player in war auction"I tend to agree here... though I am biased!
I believe this icon is very valid now, because not be nornal one Gen do a bid of 40 cards.
A word from wms on it would be appreciated. ;)
Post by: RavingRabbid on December 14, 2014, 04:06:06 pm
Post by: mrpaper on December 14, 2014, 04:22:57 pm
War needs more complicate desync rulings that defy common sense and basically void every desynced match, even if the outcome has been the same for both parties.I know you mostly say that cause you are sour, but we need bug fixes to avoid most desynchs above everything else. I know that this little bit, zanz used to take care of it when Higs asked to, I hope it gets back to normal sooner then later.
Post by: RavingRabbid on December 14, 2014, 04:28:07 pm
We need players to actually be honorable and call their losses instead of being pussies and hiding behind a dementially complicated ruleset which makes it impossible to clear the win.War needs more complicate desync rulings that defy common sense and basically void every desynced match, even if the outcome has been the same for both parties.I know you mostly say that cause you are sour, but we need bug fixes to avoid most desynchs above everything else. I know that this little bit, zanz used to take care of it when Higs asked to, I hope it gets back to normal sooner then later.
Post by: hainkarga on December 14, 2014, 04:48:40 pm
Post by: dragonsdemesne on December 14, 2014, 05:16:14 pm
Post by: RavingRabbid on December 14, 2014, 09:01:27 pm
In this case, the fix to an issue is worse than the issue itself. It's unsatisfactory and still favours forcing desyncs even more heavily than before.
Post by: theelkspeaks on December 14, 2014, 09:03:51 pm
Post by: RavingRabbid on December 14, 2014, 09:07:11 pm
Has it ever been possible to intentionally force a desync other than by intentionally dying on your own turn, such as by blowing 5 UGs into a mirror?Yes. I won't expand, due to obvious reasons, but I've been able to force timeouts, which are not real desyncs but are considered desyncs in the rules. Actual desyncs, with the yellow/red ! mark shouldn't be reliably forceable, even if I had managed to by running some odd immortal/graboid & pande combinations. I don't know if it still happens, but it used to cause bugs.
Post by: theelkspeaks on December 14, 2014, 09:11:46 pm
Has it ever been possible to intentionally force a desync other than by intentionally dying on your own turn, such as by blowing 5 UGs into a mirror?Yes. I won't expand, due to obvious reasons, but I've been able to force timeouts, which are not real desyncs but are considered desyncs in the rules. Actual desyncs, with the yellow/red ! mark shouldn't be reliably forceable, even if I had managed to by running some odd immortal/graboid & pande combinations. I don't know if it still happens, but it used to cause bugs.
Fair enough. Wasn't aware the causes of desync/timeout were well-known enough to be used.
Post by: Helston on December 14, 2014, 11:53:12 pm
Post by: serprex on January 20, 2015, 03:45:09 am
Side boards should be standard for every match (not have to be fit in through EC or roles)
Something I'm not sure about is rules vs rulings. While WMs should be able to override rules in any situation they deem as such, players want to know what to expect from rules. Also players don't want to have to have complete faith that WMs are unbiased towards any teams, even unintentionally. I'm uncertain how best to resolve this. Perhaps it's best to leave it as a player responsibility
Post by: Avenger on January 20, 2015, 05:46:16 am
Don't timeouts cause a game loss on your side, or am I confusing those with outright disconnections?I don't know how do you decide which side caused the timeout. Losing by timeout would be extremely unfair. Even more unfair than the current screenshot "solution".
Post by: Helston on January 20, 2015, 06:37:18 am
Post by: Chapuz on January 20, 2015, 01:16:33 pm
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on April 20, 2015, 11:38:46 am
1 Building an Army (#post_one) 2 Preparation (#post_two) 3 Rounds (#post_three) 4 Postbattle (#post_four) 5 Penalties (#post_five)
Q&A (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=55465.msg1152016#msg1152016)
Q&A (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php?topic=55465.msg1152016#msg1152016)
1 BUILDING AN ARMY
1.1 GENERALS
War will have 12 Generals, one for each element. Masters are the Generals of their element by default. If a Master is unable to join War, he or she will appoint a replacement General (Sr. Member or above). If a Master does not appoint a General, one will be picked by the Council.
Generals are given 25 RELICS. These RELICS will be used as currency when drafting players during the next phase. Later they will be used as an extra consumable source to include more upps to your deck.
1.2 PLAYER DRAFT
Players wanting to join War must start their own War application topic in the War Auction board (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/war-auction) where they should include relevant information. Players may ban up to 3 elements from bidding on them. However, each ban increases the minimum bid for that player by 1 RELIC. Players must include their in game name. All war matches must be played by them through that same in game name.
Players may also select any number of favorite elements. Favorite elements will be used as a tie-breaker during the draft. Not listing all non-banned elements may subject the player to a cointoss in case of a tie.
Both banned and favorite elements cannot change once bidding starts.
nb There are no guarantees you will be drafted by who you want. Drafted players who refuse to participate will be removed from the event & banned from next War.
The draft will occur over the course of 3 days.
During the Draft Phase, generals have 3 days in which they must submit a bid upon at least 5 players; the vote can vary from 1 RELIC(minium) to 5 RELICS(maximum) via private message to the WMs. The order in which the names of the players are mentioned within the PMs is going to be used to determine the player prefference the general has shown in case of equal RELIC bids.
A general cannot bid RELICS to players who:
- Have banned the general's element.
If a tie occurs where 2 or more generals bid the same amount of RELICS, the tie is broken based on the player's favorite elements. If the player does not have a favourtie element between the teams that bid to him/her, the player will be randomized to a team by the WMs.
If a team fails to draft a player for whatever reason, then they will have all of their remaining RELICS discarded and draft one of the remaining players via randomization. (To prevent this, Generals are encouraged to make sure they bid a big enough list of players and make sure their bid is high enough for each player)
2 PREPARATION
2.1 SECRET FORUM SECTION
Each team has a hidden subboard visible only to its members, Warmasters and non-participating Administrators. All discussions held here MUST be kept secret. A player caught telling team secrets to anyone outside their own team will face consequences decided on a case-by-case basis, possibly including being permanently banned from all Elements community PvP Events. Basically, don't publicly talk about anything that goes on here.
2.2 MEMBER ROLES
1. General: Responsible for coordinating the team. If a member is unable to duel the General should coordinate a substitute. 12 upgrades by default.
2. Lieutenant: Second in command. They should be the first to fill in for Generals when necessary. 9 upgrades by default.
3. Soldiers: The rest of your team. 6 upgrades by default.
2.3 THE VAULT
The Vault is your heart in War. Not only does it supply cards for deckbuilding, but acts as "hit points" for the team. If a team falls below 30 cards, they will be eliminated.
RELICS that were not used during the player draft will form the team starting RELICS. Up to this point, RELICS have just been a number, now they can be consumed to add +1 upgrade to a single match.
Vault building rules:
- EACH TEAM STARTS WITH 300 CARDS, plus 160 PRE-SET cards (see below), plus any RELICS remained from the drafting phase.
- At least 50% of cards must be in your element (restriction doesn't apply to PRE-SET cards and RELICS).
- maximum of 24 per card from your element (restriction doesn't apply to Pillars or Pendulums).
- maximum of 9 per card from other elements.
- You may not have Shards, Nymphs or Marks in your vault.
- Each team, according to their element, are going to have 160 PRE-SET in-element and Other cards within their Starting Vault.
Cards in the Vault are always unupgraded (except for the upgraded PRE-SET ones). During deckbuilding, unupgraded cards may be taken from the Vault and transformed into upgraded cards for that deck, up to the limits mentioned below (except for PRE-SET cards where the upgraded/unupgraded version can't be changed). If you move an upgraded card back to the Vault, it becomes unupgraded (PRE-SET cards become regular pillars of their element after being used in a deck and moved back to the vault).
"Mark of ..." cards are considered in the element they feature. Unlike in Tournaments, Marks are not considered equivalent to Pillars or Pendulums.
Important! Vaults are virtual. Players are not given cards taken from the Vault, nor are any cards removed from their account if they lose. Players must own the cards on their Elements game account in order to use them. If a player doesn't have a specific card in their account, they cannot use it even if that card is listed in the Vault. So try to pick cards that your members are able to access
3. STARTING A ROUND
War consists of multiple rounds. Each round lasts 1 week and will consist of 2 phases: Deckbuilding (4 days) and Duels (3 days)
3.1 DETERMINING OPPONENTS
Amount of cards in the Vault determine how many players from each team participates on a round:
| 0-29 cards | = | team is eliminated |
| 30-59 cards | = | 1 players fight |
| 60-89 cards | = | 2 players fight |
| 90-119 cards | = | 3 players fight |
| 120-149 cards | = | 4 players fight |
| 150-179 cards | = | 5 players fight |
| 180+ cards | = | 6 players fight |
Opponents will be determined randomly by Warmasters, with the constraint that no team will play another team more than once within a given round if possible. If there are an uneven number of players fighting during a round, the team which has to field the most number of players will have a bye, meaning one player in that team will skip the round. If there is more than one team which must field that number of players, then the bye will go to the team which has had the fewest byes so far out of those teams. If there is a tie for the team which has had the fewest number of byes, it will go to the team with the most cards out of those teams.
Duel pairings will be made public by Warmasters. Included should be Event Cards designed by Warmasters. Event Cards have a global effect upon all teams during that round.
In Rounds 2 & 4, teams are intentionally seeded against teams they did not play in the previous round.
3.2 DECKBUILDING
Teams must build a deck for each player fighting during the round.
Deckbuilding rules:
- Combining all decks must not use more than the vault carries. Upgraded cards in decks are counted as unupgraded cards in the vault (except for upped PRE-SET cards).
- At least 50% of the cards must be in your element (PRE-SET cards count as in-element, even those belonging to Other).
- Generals, Lieutenants, and Soldiers may use up to 12, 9, and 6 upgraded cards respectively (upped PRE-SET cards still count towards this limit, if used). Unupped PRE-SET cards can't be upgraded this way.
- At least 3 card copies of a deck must be PRE-SET cards, except if you have already used all your PRE-SET cards of your vault (PRE-SET cards become pillars of their element after being used in a deck and moved back to the vault).
- Teams may spend a RELIC to grant 1 extra upgrade to a deck. There is no limit to how many RELICS may be spent per round. However, event cards may change the ability of RELICS each round, so pay close attention. Unupped PRE-SET cards can't be upgraded this way.
Conversion: 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. Teams have unlimited conversions each round, including before round 1. PRE-SET cards can't be converted this way.
Explicitly Illegal Decks: Teams may title their illegal decks "Suicide". If so they will not be penalized beyond a 0-3 result.
You must not edit your decks, salvage, discard, etc. after the deckbuilding period ends. Doing so will result in a penalty, regardless of what the change was.
3.3 DUELS
Players will contact their opponent to try find a time that suits both. If the fight does not happen both players lose by default unless one player is clearly more active in trying to find a suitable time. Warmasters will determine who the most active player is.
Matches are best-of-five, which means that each battle's winner is the first player to win 3 duels. Remember, you must play all duels with the same deck and mark.
3.4 INACTIVE PLAYERS
If it looks like a member won't be able to fight during a round, the team has various options:
1. Temporarily replace a member with any other member. Temporary replacements use the same exact deck, number of upgrades, and mark as recorded for that player. The first and the second substitution each round is free. After that the opposing team chooses how much salvage you receive (up to 6) if you win the match.
2. Permanently replace a member with a player who submitted an application but didn't end up on a team (costs 1 RELIC).
3. To permanently replace a General (as leader of the team), every other member must agree that the General needs replacing and a consensus must be reached on who the new General will be. Warmasters will remove the General from the team at no cost. If a new player needs to be added, see above.
Note that a substitute may not use ANY cards the player they are replacing does not have.
3.5 DISCONNECTS & DESYNCS
A player who is disconnected during a duel, for any reason except for disconnect bug (link (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/confirmed-pvp-bugs/oponent-does-not-respond-and-then-i-lose)), will receive a loss for that individual duel. Both players must provide screenshots of the disconnect. The disconnected player must get a screenshot of the disconnect countdown and the "You Lost" screen (example (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/confirmed-pvp-bugs/oponent-does-not-respond-and-then-i-lose/msg1030765/#msg1030765)). The non-disconnected player may continue to play AI and must take SS of win screen if they wish to try to claim victory for the match. It is preferable that the players come to a consensus on whether a player won the disconnected match or if it should be a replay. If an agreement cannot be reached, a player who wishes to appeal the match for a win must inform their opponent. The remainder of the match can be played out, not counting the appealed game. WMs will make a ruling after the match is completed, if needed. There must be indisputable evidence that one player would have clearly won for a result to be overturned.
Desyncs will result in both players playing against the AI unless both agree to restart the duel. Screenshots of the "player not responding" countdown and the winning turn vs AI must be provided in order to claim a win or replay. Screenshots of the "Game Won" screen are insufficient. If both players beat the AI, and one player takes a screenshot while the other does not, then the player with the screenshot wins. In the event both players win or lose, and both present screenshots, a reduel will be ordered. The exception to this rule is if both players agree that one player would have won/lost if it were not for AI misplays. All games can be appealed to WMs, but there must be indisputable evidence provided that one player would have clearly won. Whether one player would have clearly won is decided strictly, and providing more information makes it more likely that an accurate ruling will occur.
If the desync causes strange things (impossible changes in game state, not including insta-win/lose) to happen, take a screenshot and the duel will be replayed.
4 POSTBATTLE
4.1 WINNING A BATTLE
The Winner of the duel starts a new topic in the "Battle Results" section, indicating the teams, the member roles, & the score. Member roles are abbreviated (Gen, Lt, Sld). For example if "KingKiller" from :air fights "LordOwner" from :water & wins 3-1, he will start a topic that could be titled in one of the following ways:
(Air Gen) KingKiller 3 - 1 (Water Lt) LordOwner
(Air Gen) KingKiller 3 - 1 LordOwner (Water Lt)
(Air Gen) KingKiller 3 - (Water Lt) LordOwner 1
(Air Sld) KingKiller 3 - 1 (Water Gen) LordOwner
(Air Lt) KingKiller 3 - (Water Sld) (Sub) LordOwner 1 (use SUB to indicate that someone else played instead of LordOwner)
In that topic KingKiller will post his deck, mentioning the amount and type of PRE-SET cards used, if any, and should summarize the match. LordOwner will then reply to that same topic with his deck, mentioning the amount and type of PRE-SET cards used too (if any). He may also talk about the battle if he so chooses. Everyone may post in the topics after LordOwner replies.
If the player who played the match is not available to post their deck immediately afterwards, one of their teammates must do it. If this happens, the player should post in the same topic as soon as they are available.
The winning team salvages cards from the opponent's deck. The winning team MUST pick 6 cards to copy from the deck of the losing player into their vault unupgraded. These cards become part of the Vault. You may NOT salvage PRE-SET cards from your opponent!.
If you can't have a complete salvage from your opponent's deck for any reason (e.g. all your opponent's cards are PRE-SET), you gain 6 RELICS instead.
When salvaging cards into your Vault, you may choose to transmute them into cards of your own element instead. Salvaged cards may be transmuted at a two to one (2:1) ratio into any in-element card which you do not already have 12 copies of in your Vault, except for Shards, Nymps and Marks.
IMPORTANT!: If your team has 5 or less players remaining (a.k.a. a vault of 179 cards or less), Salvaged cards may be transmuted at a one to one (1:1) ratio instead!
Aether salvages 6 novae. They have 9 Mindgates in their vault, so they decide to transmute all 6 novae into 3 Mindgates.
Earth salaves 6 novae while having 5 players remaining. They convert all 6 novae to 6 Antlions.
Earth salaves 6 novae while having 5 players remaining. They convert all 6 novae to 6 Antlions.
4.2 LOSING A BATTLE
When a team loses a battle they have to discard cards from the deck used. Cards that are left in the deck after discarding are returned back to Vault. (PRE-SET cards become pillars of their element after being used in a deck and moved back to the vault).
| Loss in | Discard |
| Round #1 | 9 cards |
| Round #2 | 15 cards |
| Round #3 | 20 cards |
| Round #4+ | 24 cards |
4.3 WINNING WAR
If you're the only team left, or nobody is left and you have the largest vault out of anyone who participated in the last round, you've won. The winning team of War earns:
- Cool forum award icons.
- The forum "Reigned by" image will be changed to show which element won.
- And a Mark/Nymph reward code for each worthy member (as decided by an admin)
Otherwise a new round begins.
5 PENALTIES
Penalties are issued when a team somehow breaks the rules or disrupts War. A penalized team must discard from their Vault at the round's end. The following are guidelines, and Warmasters will determine penalties on a case-by-case basis.
Minor penalty: 3 cards. Small & harmless things like posting an illegal deck by mistake.
Medium penalty: 6 cards. For bigger infractions like not doing what they are supposed to do because of inactivity.
Major penalty: 12 cards. For major infractions like seriously disrupting the whole event.
BACKROOM DEALS
Conspiring with other teams is forbidden. Even discussing already public information ruins the spirit of the event, making it less fun for everybody.
To see how War is in reality, visit the War Archive subboard (http://elementscommunity.org/forum/index.php/board,175.0.html). Some things were done differently during previous Wars but the principles remain.
Season of the Mark:
This round's conversion phase, you may convert a card of your vault to the Mark of the card's respective element.
Season of the Mark appears during rounds 1, 3, 5 and 7 of War#9.
Season of the Nymph:
This round's conversion phase, you may convert a card of your vault to the Nymph of the card's respective element.
Season of the Nymph appears during rounds 2, 4, 5 and 7 of War#9.
Season of the Shard:
This round's conversion phase, you may convert a card of your vault to the Shard of the card's respective element.
Season of the Shard appears during rounds 3, 4, 6 and 7 of War#9.
Season of the Challenge:
A team may declare a challenge against any other team. The challenge is a special PvP duel with special PvP rules. The rules are PMed to the WMs and, if approved, they are publicly declared. The duel must occur between two players of the two teams during the next round of War#9. Winning team gains 6 relics and losing team discards 12 cards. A targeted team may decline a challenge at the cost of 3 relics.
Season of the Shard appears during rounds 9 and beyond, but a team may use it only once during War#9.
Post by: Avenger on April 20, 2015, 06:57:05 pm
Post by: iancudorinmarian on April 20, 2015, 07:34:02 pm
Didn't read past draft. I thought we all hated draft...I actually liked the old draft system.
Post by: ddevans96 on April 20, 2015, 08:30:21 pm
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on April 20, 2015, 09:34:12 pm
Pre-set cards, ARTHA? Any reason for suggesting that change? To me it seems like it would make Vault management even more complex, deckbuilding a hassle, and it forces us to have cards we might not want that many copies of or any copies of at all (looking at Water, 9 floodings and the majority of the other cards for example).
Greater variety, plus it is a noble way to enforce greater balance and originality between the elements (I may explain it more in detail later...).
EDIT: Also, keep in mind that there is an EC card that allows Shards in certain rounds with this ruleset, meaning that cards like Flooding can be more than just good during these rounds. Also, the :rainbow Pre-Set cards are considered in-element for deckbuilding purposes. Moreover, I have not finished the Pre-Set card balance; I think I have yet to nerf :fire and :air Pre-Set cardpool as much as I should...
Post by: andretimpa on April 20, 2015, 10:04:26 pm
PRE-SET cards become regular pillars of their element after being used in a deck and moved back to the vault
this is easily the most problematic aspect of PRE-SET cards, specially for elements that have difficulty salvaging in element. That's why you give teams the choice of what they want to throw away and turn into pillars during conversions.
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on April 21, 2015, 07:15:56 pm
PRE-SET cards become regular pillars of their element after being used in a deck and moved back to the vault
this is easily the most problematic aspect of PRE-SET cards, specially for elements that have difficulty salvaging in element. That's why you give teams the choice of what they want to throw away and turn into pillars during conversions.
This is also the least important factor of Pre-Set cards and it is easy to be removed. However, I don't view them as a loss; you will always discard Pillars/Pends at discard phases of War after games where you've lost, so you will always be at great need of new pillars/pends. Moreover, I prefer some Pre-Set cards to be usable just once (especially Quantum Pillars/Towers; they are there to encourage pillar-based rainbows but not to turn War's meta to a rainbow one).
As for having difficulty salvaging in-element cards, please read the special 5-or-less-team-members conversion rule. ;)
IMPORTANT!: If your team has 5 or less players remaining, Salvaged cards may be transmuted at a one to one (1:1) ratio instead!
Didn't read past draft. I thought we all hated draft...I actually liked the old draft system.
Imho, current draft system is too slow. Draft can be done within a few days. More importantly, buying teammates with tons of cards result in great vault imbalances; +/- 30 cards (or more) difference between vaults is a whole deck and a huge advantage/disadvantage! On the other hand, the Relic-based system doesn't allow for much imbalance between starting vaults and still let you benefit from low bids by keeping more relics to use at War.
Post by: Ginyu on April 21, 2015, 08:15:41 pm
Quote from: ARTHANASIOS
More importantly, buying teammates with tons of cards result in great vault imbalances; +/- 30 cards (or more) difference between vaults is a whole deck and a huge advantage/disadvantage!
That's a thing to be considered by generals when bidding. They have it in their hand how many cards to spend, though cost increase for banned elements could be a bit lower. I don't mind to keep this system as well, however I am open for other suggestions.
I disagree with using such a conversion rule for 5- team members. Why not just inviting a player that wasn't drafted, but wants to play? Also, 1-1 instead of 2-1 is a huge difference.
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on April 22, 2015, 02:29:04 am
I disagree with using such a conversion rule for 5- team members. Why not just inviting a player that wasn't drafted, but wants to play? Also, 1-1 instead of 2-1 is a huge difference.
5-team-members conversion rule has nothing to do with draft and/or player inactivity. It has to do with slim vaults that allow only for 5 (or less) players to have matches with other War teams. Since teams like these are dying, have very few deckbuilding options and in-element cardpool is drying out, the 1:1 conversion ratio allows them to stay alive for longer.
| 0-29 cards | = | team is eliminated |
| 30-59 cards | = | 1 players fight |
| 60-89 cards | = | 2 players fight |
| 90-119 cards | = | 3 players fight |
| 120-149 cards | = | 4 players fight |
| 150-179 cards | = | 5 players fight |
| 180+ cards | = | 6 players fight |
Post by: Ginyu on April 22, 2015, 08:31:51 am
Quote from: ARTHANASIOS
IMPORTANT!: If your team has 5 or less players remaining, Salvaged cards may be transmuted at a one to one (1:1) ratio instead!
Still, 1-1 instead of 2-1 is a huge advantage. Also, allowing teams to stay as long as they have 30 or more cards combined with 1-1 will stretch war by several weeks. Not sure if this is a good thing.
Post by: theelkspeaks on April 22, 2015, 01:36:29 pm
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on April 23, 2015, 02:30:53 am
Okay, in that case you should rewrite this part, as it is easy to misunderstand:Quote from: ARTHANASIOSIMPORTANT!: If your team has 5 or less players remaining, Salvaged cards may be transmuted at a one to one (1:1) ratio instead!
Still, 1-1 instead of 2-1 is a huge advantage. Also, allowing teams to stay as long as they have 30 or more cards combined with 1-1 will stretch war by several weeks. Not sure if this is a good thing.
Maybe the way to fix that part of the suggestion is to put a limited number on 1:1s, such as maybe only allowing 5 1:1s per round (and after that the usual 2:1, and maybe only if they're at 3 or fewer players instead of 5.
Part will be slightly rephrased to avoid confusion. As for 1:1 conversion being OP, keep in mind that both the 1:2 and 1:1 conversion rules can be applied only to a salvage, thus it has already a pretty limiting scope because you can convert up to 6 cards (and no more) for each bo5 your team won this round; 5-player-left teams (a.k.a. 179 vault cards or less) are already cornered and they have to pull out a good performance to win even a few games. However, if people think it is still too powerful, allowing it for 3-player-left teams (a.k.a. 119 vault cards or less) can solve this issue, like Elk's suggestion.
Post by: Avenger on April 23, 2015, 04:09:29 pm
Didn't read past draft. I thought we all hated draft...I actually liked the old draft system.
Old? As in last war?
I preferred the ancient auction system. I don't care if it takes some time, it gives you time to prepare. Auction is/was part of war strategies.
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on April 23, 2015, 06:54:51 pm
I preferred the ancient auction system. I don't care if it takes some time, it gives you time to prepare. Auction is/was part of war strategies.If you wait for War to start in order to start preparing for it you are just too-little-too-late.
Moreover, do you think it is fair for people who enter War prepared to lose a whole week (maybe more) of their real-lives waiting for others to do so while they could had done so since Trials (or even earlier)? ::)
I mean no offence; just my 2 :electrum...
Post by: Avenger on April 24, 2015, 10:24:04 pm
I preferred the ancient auction system. I don't care if it takes some time, it gives you time to prepare. Auction is/was part of war strategies.If you wait for War to start in order to start preparing for it you are just too-little-too-late.
Moreover, do you think it is fair for people who enter War prepared to lose a whole week (maybe more) of their real-lives waiting for others to do so while they could had done so since Trials (or even earlier)? ::)
I mean no offence; just my 2 :electrum...
As i mentioned, i consider the auction as part of war, so it isn't lost time for me. If we take your approach... we could also cut the first few rounds of games, and lets just play war in a single round in direct elimination. We could finish it in a weekend. Probably we shouldn't even start life/gravity teams as it seems unfair to be in those teams :D
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on April 25, 2015, 06:42:31 am
* Auction lacks action and, because of this, it is boring. Actually, it is both long and boring...
* Heh, you can believe whatever you like but :gravity and :life will surely own War #9! AdrenaChargers ftw!! :P
Post by: Vangelios on April 25, 2015, 07:37:11 am
:life the rules need change a lot of things in favor of life, to life be alive :P
I really admire players who play war with life believing that life have chances of win
Post by: dawn to dusk on April 25, 2015, 08:10:46 am
:gravity maybeyea... well... fire didnt go well last war! :'(
:life the rules need change a lot of things in favor of life, to life be alive :P
I really admire players who play war with life believing that life have chances of win
/me runs off
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on April 25, 2015, 12:57:33 pm
:gravity maybeyea... well... fire didnt go well last war! :'(
:life the rules need change a lot of things in favor of life, to life be alive :P
I really admire players who play war with life believing that life have chances of win
/me runs off
@dawn: Keep your ground and defend :life with your own :life instead of running away. :P
@vang: You may be a forum buddy of mine, but seriously dude, before teaching War meta to others do the slightest effort to actually lead your team to War instead of having yourself replaced... :P
Post by: Vangelios on April 25, 2015, 05:13:18 pm
Post by: ARTHANASIOS on April 25, 2015, 05:56:29 pm
Naah ... I have participated in two wars, it is enough to know what life can do there, also I can take any team to war, less fire or aether, because I'm not a coward and I don't like to win with absurd advantages vs another teams. Put deuce or Root in life to you see what happens...
Fair enough... :)
Post by: Avenger on April 25, 2015, 07:58:10 pm
* Your "direct elimination" approach is interesting for some events. After all, Weekly Tournies are based on it (lose a bo3 and you're out, except if you wish to fight for 3rd place or something). I wouldn't mind a super-fast War either tbh.
* Auction lacks action and, because of this, it is boring. Actually, it is both long and boring...
* Heh, you can believe whatever you like but :gravity and :life will surely own War #9! AdrenaChargers ftw!! :P
Heh. I didn't expect you would (almost) embrace direct elimination. I actually like long events. A single fault in such long events won't lead to defeat, while in tourneys, it is usually a single game that kills you.
Hopefully, the shards will even the playing field a bit, or at least change the meta to be less used to.