WAR - RULES

[Scaredgirl]

I have an Idea for a Territory Map that I used in one of my other card/taxctical games, I think it could work well here. Want to hear abount it?

Sure, but I'd like to keep this is as simple as possible and using a map would take it to a whole new level.

In theory we could have a big map with squares and place players there. Then they could move around the map, fighting other players, collecting resources, etc. However it would probably be best to start with this simplified version and maybe evolve it when the next War comes.

Honestly, a change to 12 favors elements with good rush deck options.  If a team can build two of the exact same already established kickass rush decks, it's gonna end tragically for the others.

This is why I had the 6 card limit at first. Everyone and their uncle knows that Earth is going to build two identical Shrieker Rush decks, and I'm sure we will see the same in other elements as well. It would have been nicer to have more variation.

About 180 vs. 240.. I'm not sure which one is better. I like 240 because you can build exactly eight 30 card decks so it's kind of 2 decks for each player. Then again the number might be too big and only make the event last longer and longer.

if there are enough cards for 3 decks left, who is playing them then? how is the rotation?

Master decides the order in which players use the Vault. For example if everyone loses the first round and there are 60 cards left in the Vault, Master can decide that players C and D use those cards while others wait.

Now lets say player C loses, but player D keeps winning and salvaging until there are 30+ cards in the Vault. In this situation either player A or B will use the Vault. Player C cannot use the Vault before both players A and B have used it.

Why not compromise with 9 cards?

Or keep it at 12 but then make a rule where team members can't have more than 75% (or whatever % you want) of their decks be the same.

I thought about 9 too. That's certainly one option. Perhaps we should have a poll on this.

Interesting, but as previously mentioned, this WILL take forever to finish.  I'm would bet at least months.  If each team has 180 cards, that team would need to lose 151 cards to be knocked out.  With three cards being lost per battle, that would take 13 rounds to be knocked out assuming they lost every battle.  Add two rounds for every battle won for that team.  When it comes down to a group of evenly matched teams who win and lose more or less evenly, this could drag out for a very long time.

What if the losing team had to drop X cards of their choice permanently?

If you lose a battle, you will lose ALL of those cards. Winning player will salvage 6 cards from your deck, and others are permanently removed from the game.


EDIT: I set up a poll. Go vote.

[Kael Hate]

... If each team has 180 cards, that team would need to lose 151 cards to be knocked out..

This is why I suggested a territoy system.

Each Territory is a card with a link to 4 or 6 other Teritory cards and the card allows you to the cards listed in that location. You may challenge a team with a card attached to your card with a deck made from all cards in your territories (sharded between team members). If you win, you get those cards from that player. If the masters wanted to make a 180 card list I could have this ready to go in a few hours. 

This could also allow the world to go on indefinitely.

[Kael Hate]

Is the poll option 4 supposed to state "cards of your element"?

[PhantomFox]

I think I understand it now.  But one loss by any team could be devastating.  If they're running 6 of one card, that could almost wipe out that card from their vault.  Not that this is a bad thing, as it makes deckbuilding more tactical.  Do you take all the good cards, or do you play it safe in case you lose?  Hmm....

[Kael Hate]

Would this work?



Each Master has 4x 40 card decks to start with. Each of the decks must have 50% or more of their element and the same non-in-element card cannot exist more than 6 times within those 4 decks. This group of cards becomes the Main pool and all they have to work with for the war +/- the cards they win or lose. Upgraded cards and normal cards are considered the same card for taking up slots.

(lol, i could easily turn this into territory cards too)

[Dragoon]

do we post here or PM the masters to ask to join there team?

edit: and what should happen if for some reason a master is unable to recruit 3 people to his team?

We'll start a recruitment thread later. You can PM Masters if you want, but please don't post it here.

If a Master cannot get 3 players, he/she will play with a smaller team and lower number of Cards in the Vault. Each player = 45 cards.

Why handicap an element if they can't get a full roster?  Is there any reason why 2 or 3 people couldn't get the whole 240 cards?  That way each element gets to play an equal number of initial games. If one element is perceived as weak and no one wants to join that team, I don't think the team should be penalized with less "life points."  But that's just my opinion.

[Essence]

I really wish people would see restrictions as a possibility of doing something differently and thinking outside the box, rather than something evil that stops them from building their good old top-50 grinder they've been playing daily for the last 5 months.

Even with a 6 card restriction, any element would have been able to build 5-6 functional decks. All of them wouldn't have been "awesome", but neither would have the decks from other elements.

After really stopping and thinking about this for an hour or so, and actually writing some stuff out, I agree with ScaredGirl on this.  I think the 6-card limit would actually make things MORE fun, not less.

Especially if Gargoyle comes out before the War starts.

[Scaredgirl]

Why handicap an element if they can't get a full roster?  Is there any reason why 2 or 3 people couldn't get the whole 240 cards?  That way each element gets to play an equal number of initial games. If one element is perceived as weak and no one wants to join that team, I don't think the team should be penalized with less "life points."  But that's just my opinion.

Because that could lead to a situation where a Master didn't even bother to look for the 4th player.

Also if there are less players but the same amount of cards, it takes longer to "kill" that element. Remember, one round lasts days.

I think this rule is good motivator for Masters to fill that roster. It's only 3 players. Shouldn't be too hard.

I really wish people would see restrictions as a possibility of doing something differently and thinking outside the box, rather than something evil that stops them from building their good old top-50 grinder they've been playing daily for the last 5 months.

Even with a 6 card restriction, any element would have been able to build 5-6 functional decks. All of them wouldn't have been "awesome", but neither would have the decks from other elements.

After really stopping and thinking about this for an hour or so, and actually writing some stuff out, I agree with ScaredGirl on this.  I think the 6-card limit would actually make things MORE fun, not less.

Especially if Gargoyle comes out before the War starts.

Too late for that now. I already set up a poll and now we can all see how Democracy fails.

Well, at least it's not 12 cards.

[killsdazombies]

yea there have been lots of "let me join PLLLLZZZZ" things in the chat lately

[Terroking]

A time deck has Silurians to attack with. That's it, really. If you had the rares, you could do a Pharaoh deck too but mummies won't be effective sine you can only take 3.

So wrong... for time obviously most of the decks would be duo, so you can construct deja vu decks, scarab decks, half time graboid decks, half time anything deck.

Even with this restriction of 6 of any card I could design 10 or more effective decks such that you could play any 4 of them without conflicting cards. I for one like the rules as they are. It clearly encourages variety in decks.

I see why some of you might be against losing your whole deck in case of defeat but it's a war, soldiers lose lifes, losing the deck is still better than simply eliminating the player from the event which would be more realistic. Also it's going to be a huge event anyway so a system like that ensures that it won't take too long for one element to win.

Sorry, that was speaking with the 3-card maximum from other elements, which would leave you with those 3 Graboids as your only hitters (If you were Earth-heavy enough, you could take Shriekers, Golems and lions don't work well because they have to be unupped) unless you chose to take Silurains as well, restating my point.

Those restrictions are gone now though, so it's irrelevant.

[Kael Hate]

I'm working on the Territory Generator.
Have we settled that 45 cards per player is going to be the norm?

If so I'm going to turn each players card set into 9 Territories of 5 cards with links to 6 other territories.
When you battle for a territory you claim the losers and the cards the territory supports.
Does this sound plausible?

At the moment the generator lets you dump in the 45 cards from each player then it generates the world cards.

[Scaredgirl]

I'm working on the Territory Generator.
Have we settled that 45 cards per player is going to be the norm?

If so I'm going to turn each players card set into 9 Territories of 5 cards with links to 6 other territories.
When you battle for a territory you claim the losers and the cards the territory supports.
Does this sound plausible?

At the moment the generator lets you dump in the 45 cards from each player then it generates the world cards.

Can you start a new thread about this territory project or yours? It only confuses people here because they might think it's actually a part of this event. Like I said, we are not going to do any map/territory things in this first version of War to avoid over-complicating things.

Right now it's 60 cards per player but that's still subject to change.