WAR - Suggestions and Feedback

[Scaredgirl]

In all honesty, I thought this thread is about giving feedback on current rules, with a goal of making it more competitive and enjoyable for its players. If you're having a rule set in stone, than I'm not sure why I bother.

There's no need to get all aggressive. I can assure you that I read all the feedback on this thread, and have made many changes according to that feedback.

For example someone suggested we lower the discarding amount. This was a good idea because players can save some of the most important cards. I lowered the discarding amount to 24.

Troh suggested converting cards to Pillars. Again, a great idea that helps with the Vault. In War #2 we will only discard 24 cards.

And if we go further back, the basic idea of the Vault came from Gl1tch, who suggested that cards would act as "life points".

So you suggesting that I don't listen to feedback and ideas, and don't even care about making the event more enjoyable for it's players, is simply false. I just didn't like your idea. It's nothing personal, but I just don't think introducing some kind of HP (or "territories") for each element is the best way to go here.

Like I've said a million times, most problems with the Vault during this War were caused by bad planning. This is not some theory, it's a fact. All I need to do is go to a secret section and see it for myself. I mean if an element took 40% less Pillars in their starting Vault than they should have, are you going to blame the rules for that?

I am confident that with these new rules, all the major problems will go away. However nothing is set to stone yet, so things might still change according to new suggestions and ideas.

And an idea just struck me. In Texas Holdem, the blinds go up as the game goes on. What if we did that in war? In the beginning, you only lose 15 cards for a loss but only gain three. Every round, the ante goes up by a few cards (Round 2 = lose 18, gain 3, Round 3 = lose 21, gain 4, Round 4 = lose 24, gain 4, Round 5 = lose 27, gain 5...). Of course the exact numbers could be changed, and maybe it would be best to make you always salvage 6 cards.

Since, after-all, the later battles in a war are generally more risky, desperate, and more important.

That would be great in slowly making battles more epic, but I'm afraid that it would lead to a huge amount of confusion about the numbers. Even with a simple 30 discard / 6 salvage rule, some teams managed to totally break their Vault in two rounds.

I'll have to think about it. If there was a way of doing it without the possibility of mass confusion, then it certainly would be a possibility.

One option would of course be to use the number of the round somehow, like you lose 6 cards times the number of the round: 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36..

[Demagog]

More stringent penalties would work to negate the confusion. If a team has to discard an extra 30 cards per penalty, they'd be much more careful.

[Scaredgirl]

More stringent penalties would work to negate the confusion. If a team has to discard an extra 30 cards per penalty, they'd be much more careful.

I don't like harsh penalties myself.

For example if a Master stays up until 3am to build decks for his team, it doesn't feel right to hand out 30 card penalties if he made some small mistake with one card. It should be the duels that determine the winner, not attention to detail.

Of course some penalties are required to keep players sharp, but I don't think penalties should be even close to how much you lose when you lose a duel.

[Demagog]

Then perhaps on top of the current "lose 6 for each penalty" you could add a +1 or 2 cards lost per loss. So if a team makes three penalties before the end of round three, they'll lose 3-6 more cards than they would have originally (from losses in r3).

[PuppyChow]

Making decks is one thing, but screwing up your vault is another. Maybe we should have different "levels" of penalty.

Minor Infraction: 3-6 Card Penalty
Infraction: 10-12 Card Penalty
Major Infraction: 15-18 Card Penalty
Red-Zone Infraction: 21-24 Card Penalty

Again, numbers could be changed. This would just be to provide some rules as to what you're losing instead of on a case-by-case basis. For instance, failing to update your discarded vault or doing so incorrectly could be a major infraction, while failing to salvage may only be a minor infraction (since you're really only hurting yourself). <--- Just examples. Major infractions/Red-zone infractions would only be used in say, maybe, cheating or deliberately disobeying rules.

But I think that rule clarification is needed for more reasons than just to make the increasing card losses a better idea. Just makes the war more organized. Instead of people wondering the number of cards they've been penalized, they can just see "oh, we got a minor infraction, so we lose x amount of cards."

Warmaster discretion could be used, of course; if someone makes an infraction but they have a great excuse or went above and beyond the call of duty by staying up late, it could be reduced to a minor infraction.

[Malduk]

@ SG, that wasnt aggressive, that was resigned. When your points are not addressed, but simply put aside, it is quite normal to stop bothering about it.

You saw first vault, you see secret areas, but you lack a huge pile of information simply because you're not a player. And thats a fact too.
I'm guessing you wont be a player in a second war either, the one these rules will apply to.


@ PuppyChow: LOVE the idea.

[Malduk]

Making decks is one thing, but screwing up your vault is another. Maybe we should have different "levels" of penalty.

Minor Infraction: 3-6 Card Penalty
Infraction: 10-12 Card Penalty
Major Infraction: 15-18 Card Penalty
Red-Zone Infraction: 21-24 Card Penalty

Again, numbers could be changed. This would just be to provide some rules as to what you're losing instead of on a case-by-case basis. For instance, failing to update your discarded vault or doing so incorrectly could be a major infraction, while failing to salvage may only be a minor infraction (since you're really only hurting yourself). <--- Just examples. Major infractions/Red-zone infractions would only be used in say, maybe, cheating or deliberately disobeying rules.

But I think that rule clarification is needed for more reasons than just to make the increasing card losses a better idea. Just makes the war more organized. Instead of people wondering the number of cards they've been penalized, they can just see "oh, we got a minor infraction, so we lose x amount of cards."

Warmaster discretion could be used, of course; if someone makes an infraction but they have a great excuse or went above and beyond the call of duty by staying up late, it could be reduced to a minor infraction.

I'd say that penalties so far were pretty decent. Lucky factor here was that most "illegal" decks were losing decks, so no team was really hurt by mistakes.
But yes, I agree that some set of rules for penalties should be made.

[Scaredgirl]

Well, I've been using this system so far:

6 card penalty: small fails like illegal deck
12 card penalty: bigger fails like not posting any decks during deckbuilding, postponing the event (btw that example will get you 18 card penalty during War #2)

I think for War #2 we need a 18 card penalty as well, but I don't think we should go past that. If there is an infraction that would require a penalty of 24+ cards, I'd probably just disqualify the whole team.

[PuppyChow]

Well, I've been using this system so far:

6 card penalty: small fails like illegal deck
12 card penalty: bigger fails like not posting any decks during deckbuilding, postponing the event (btw that example will get you 18 card penalty during War #2)

I think for War #2 we need a 18 card penalty as well, but I don't think we should go past that. If there is an infraction that would require a penalty of 24+ cards, I'd probably just disqualify the whole team.

Sounds good, but clarifying that in the rules topic would make it more clear that there are penalties and what they are. Maybe just something like

Type of Infraction	Penalty	Example
Minor	6 Cards	Illegal decks
Major	12 Cards	Failure to post any decks during deck building

*Warmaster and/or Admin reserves the right to use judgment when applying a penalty.

[MrBlonde]

Just popping in to say 6-0 is a 36 card comeback, not a 6 card comeback. Still not a lot, but it's a start.


And an idea just struck me. In Texas Holdem, the blinds go up as the game goes on. What if we did that in war? In the beginning, you only lose 15 cards for a loss but only gain three. Every round, the ante goes up by a few cards (Round 2 = lose 18, gain 3, Round 3 = lose 21, gain 4, Round 4 = lose 24, gain 4, Round 5 = lose 27, gain 5...). Of course the exact numbers could be changed, and maybe it would be best to make you always salvage 6 cards.

Since, after-all, the later battles in a war are generally more risky, desperate, and more important.

That actually sounds like a good idea and a fun way to do it. That way you aren't as hamstringed if you start out very poorly round 1. Of course war does get much faster once a bunch of people are out though so maybe just the first few rounds have the lesser deductions.

[MrBlonde]

I don't like harsh penalties myself.

For example if a Master stays up until 3am to build decks for his team, it doesn't feel right to hand out 30 card penalties if he made some small mistake with one card. It should be the duels that determine the winner, not attention to detail.

Of course some penalties are required to keep players sharp, but I don't think penalties should be even close to how much you lose when you lose a duel.

I agree with this as well and not just because i personally violated these rules. Getting all the decks together, keeping the Vault straight, and making sure everything is perfect is quite a task (especially at 3-4am). For example i made a suicide deck and accidentally put in 2 upped fractals. If you saw the deck it obviously wasn't on purpose and getting a 30 card penalty would be ridiculous.

[Glitch]

Just a minor point, but the terms "perfect counter" and "suicide deck" should be banned from the war.

For starters, "perfect counter" means that no matter the circumstance, you cannot possibly have one.  As disconnects can warrant wins, this is not physically possible.

And I cannot tell you how angry I was when people accused my deck, which I spent lots of time planning, a "suicide deck".  That's just offensive.  Like, maybe you can all your own deck that, but calling someone else's deck that is just plain being mean.