War Reform

[dawn to dusk]

Reposting from S&F

Post 1

So with all the discussion around how next war will have fewer players, many have liked the idea of "Dual elements" war, but I feel like it wouldn't feel as satisfying to win, if you share the win with another element.
But what if we ran 2 smaller wars each year? Had some discussions with Jen earlier, and this was the end result

The first, a "losers" war, would feature the bottom 8 teams of this war (or the bottom 8 from a Masters tourney or something), where they fight. The top 4 of that war then join the leftover 4 for a "winners war", where the winner of that is prestigious or something. With the bottom 4 from that war demoting back down to the losers war. Trials can be handled between the winners war and the following losers war, with Brawl in the middle of the year. With the smaller amount of teams, it can be balanced to average the War to 10 rounds or so, and due to the setup, new Masters will always get a chance to win the winners war.
The problem would be that not all elements would feature in every war, but the idea might still have some merit

EDIT: Noted that I had discussions about this with Jen, who initially brought up the discussion with me and suggested a few of the things. I don't want to take full credit~


Post 2

Elemental representation was a worry that I had with the Prom/Rel (promotion/relegation) system, and is a valid concern. It's worth noting that with approximately 1 war per year, this would optimistically have 2 smaller wars a year, but each element would feature in at least 1 war. I will discuss some of the questions that I remember from chat below, but first I would like to discuss some of the problems I have with a dual element war.

It's pretty much impossible to prepare for. With such a drastic change to the format, the first war will almost certainly be disgustingly unbalanced. This is fine if it were only for 1 war, but even 2 or 3 wars down the line, I feel like some of the kinks will still be ironing out. The decision to choose the pairings needs to be more than "first place with last place", "opposite elements", or something similar, else you're going to end up with one or two pairings being horrendously stronger than others, while others would be much much weaker.

Assuming the pairings change each war (and I don't see why they wouldn't unless you go opposite elements), a crapton of work would need to go into balancing the market. And initial market prices are almost never perfectly balanced. Trying to balance for dual elements is worse than trying to balance for mono elements as well. It would be that much a hassle that you'd honestly need to get rid of Market (which is what some want anyway, but still). However it does go back to the thing of "how are elements decided"? As to how much a nightmare market pricings would be

Last thing I'll note, I feel like " "Dual elements" or "different division" just dilute the original idea." is grossly underplaying. I mean it's bad enough that you'd need to share your win~ But the idea is more like a PvP Event than a War Change. Solo is almost always more popular than Duo, assuming the duo exists at all. Tennis being the primary example. Solo accomplishments feel better than duo accomplishments.

Minor note but the banner would be weird, but you could probably manage the banner being one element and the icon being a different element, or something similar.


Onto a few questions about Prom/Rel that were asked

Will the winning teams stay the same if they promote?

It would probably be optional. Players can opt in to stay on their original team, else they would be put up on auction.

WM workload?

I have never been a WM, so some of the stuff here is from Math and Asdw in chat
Most of the work would be done for the first war of the year, presumably. Rules would remain the same, but a few unbalanced things could be ironed out. Vault Tools are a pretty hefty problem, but the workload is reduced by a lot with the introduction of GDocs, and they could probably be optimised further. With less teams, the workload of individual wars would drop, and the war in total would only really have to go for 10 rounds or so, maybe less maybe a little more depending on rules and such. WM's could switch between wars, and you can still hire the pre-War Warmasters, as was mentioned elsewhere in this thread (which is an idea that I fully +1).


Less teams means less dilution of people across so many teams. This is one of the major benefits of this idea

[immortal feud]

some sort of a prewar skirmish to decide what 6 elements actually participate in war. generals bid upgrades for a Lt then the 2 players represent the element in the skirimish, play every team once bo3 15 upgrades - w/e was bid on the Lt. Top 6 teams get to play war. minimal deckbuilding rules; half deck in element, 4 upps in element, shards and off element cards can only feature in 1 deck

I do think we can expect less people to participate next war and less teams will be what has to be done, may aswell get another event out of deciding what elements are represented

[Zso_Zso]

How about braking up a War into multiple stages as separate events:

Event 1: qualifier war between 6 elements, the top-3 will advance into final
Event 2: qualifier war between the other 6 elements, the top-3 will advance into final
Event 3: final war between the 6 qualified elements.

The key is that the 3 events are consecutive so that the same players can be drafted into both Events 1 and 2.
In event 3 new teams are drafted again, only the master/general advances automatically with the element from qualifier to final.

[serprex]

I can't speak for anyone else, but a big reason I've not been in War or any tourneys lately is simply time zone differences.

Would people be more likely to join War if teams had multiple matches vs each other, but there was no designated player for that match? ie everyone is Player 4

[immortal feud]

big fan of everyone being player 4.
i dont think people hogging all the matches selfishly is a problem but playing around nymphs/marks would change, im not sure if that would be a positive or negative effect.

[ARTHANASIOS]

How about braking up a War into multiple stages as separate events:

Event 1: qualifier war between 6 elements, the top-3 will advance into final
Event 2: qualifier war between the other 6 elements, the top-3 will advance into final
Event 3: final war between the 6 qualified elements.

The key is that the 3 events are consecutive so that the same players can be drafted into both Events 1 and 2.
In event 3 new teams are drafted again, only the master/general advances automatically with the element from qualifier to final.

This is an interesting idea!

[immortal feud]

How about braking up a War into multiple stages as separate events:

Event 1: qualifier war between 6 elements, the top-3 will advance into final
Event 2: qualifier war between the other 6 elements, the top-3 will advance into final
Event 3: final war between the 6 qualified elements.

The key is that the 3 events are consecutive so that the same players can be drafted into both Events 1 and 2.
In event 3 new teams are drafted again, only the master/general advances automatically with the element from qualifier to final.

that sounds like 3 wars that are all basically the same format and then you might get split loyalties in the 3rd miniwar for the trophy, i light a different styled event for sorting out which 6 elements will compete

[Zso_Zso]

Spoiler for Hidden:

How about braking up a War into multiple stages as separate events:

Event 1: qualifier war between 6 elements, the top-3 will advance into final
Event 2: qualifier war between the other 6 elements, the top-3 will advance into final
Event 3: final war between the 6 qualified elements.

The key is that the 3 events are consecutive so that the same players can be drafted into both Events 1 and 2.
In event 3 new teams are drafted again, only the master/general advances automatically with the element from qualifier to final.

that sounds like 3 wars that are all basically the same format and then you might get split loyalties in the 3rd miniwar for the trophy, i light a different styled event for sorting out which 6 elements will compete

Yes, 3 miniwars, in fact the first 2 can be even shorter, no need to drag them out until the winner is decided. The qualifiers can stop once 3 teams have fallen. Typically the end-part of the war is dragging out long and less players involved so not so exciting for the community as a whole.

[Wyand]

As I stated before it would be very sad if the original format of War would cease to exist.

WAR = ALL 12 elements competing each other in ONE HUGE BATTLE.

No "team leagues" pls, that's not War. I know that without updates it is hard to make the game alive, but we are a community,
we must do everything possible. Element's birthday was cool, many veterans entered chat and a few them still tag along,
which is very good I think. Glory days won't come back, that's a fact. But we can still make the COMMUNITY interesting for ex and
new players.

The format of War 12 was ok, I think. With the dwindling player base 3-man teams with the additional "Player 4" worked good,
better than expected.

What options do we have? As I said: make the community look interesting and active. When a guest enters chat and asks
"hey, what's new with this game, any new updates etc.etc.etc.?" pls don't tell them that the "game is dead, no updates,  ".
Don't scare away potential players. Just ask them if they want to PvP, and meanwhile you can tell them about the present
state of the game. It is possible that most of them don't know that there are weekly tournaments, PvP events like 12 Lives,
and WAR! Tell them the positive aspects, let's show'em that we are alive and kickin'!

[TheonlyrealBeef]

Polls have been included, please let us know your opinion on these fundamental questions that will help shape the rules of next war.

As I stated before it would be very sad if the original format of War would cease to exist.

WAR = ALL 12 elements competing each other in ONE HUGE BATTLE.

This is included as an option in the poll, and I am sure the utmost will be done to make it happen should this be the preferred option. However, I do ask that people be realistic on the expected turnout for the next war when casting their votes.

[serprex]

My votes:
2 months. I might be biased from having gone through the full 4 months last war
1 phase. KISS & players should be in for the whole thing anyways
6 teams. Having a pre-event to eliminate 6 teams between Masters or whatnot could work (Not so opposed to 2 phase event with first phase being Masters only). Also fun stuff potentially with teams auctioning to ally if we go for dual elemental teams. I really like my idea of having players pinned on an element while sharing a vault
Elimination. This is War. Attrition is the game

[Wyand]

My votes.

3 months. Clicked first the 4 months option, but then remembered how hard it was on my nerves. Btw, I guess it would be
easier for the 2nd time (if I happen to be General again, somehow). I could roll with the 4 months option, too, but pls, include
one or two 1 week breaks.

1 phase. ONE WAR.

12 teams. I'm pretty sure 36 players can be gathered half year from now. We should promote Trials, since that alone
can decide how successful War gets, too.

Spoiler for Hidden:

Elimination. As serprex said, attrition is the name of the game. True to the word "War".