A bit more than three weeks ago we presented our Standard format project. After having read your comments we changed the way to implement it. No need to go back over the previous version of this project (you can read the 700 and more comments if you wish), I'm going to talk about the final version.
The goal is still the same : offer a scalable and restrictive format.
Today, we have to many playable characters in each clan. New players are lost with all these options while paradoxically, old players own the best characters but always play with the same ones. With the Standard format, we want to offer to the new and old players a more restrictive environment if they wish, with less options in each clan but more often renewed.
What will we do?
1/ Create a list of characters called "Standard" which will be reset half-yearly. In this list you'll find all characters (and LD too) released within the three last years before the update, Leaders, starter deck characters and characters released after the update. You'll find 13 to 16 characters in each clan. New clan will keep all their characters.
2/ We will create a new deck format:
Standard format: Standard characters only, 40 stars max., no double.
3/ T1 and T2 will be renamed in Extended and Extended 25.
Extended format: all characters are allowed, 40 stars max. no double, equivalent to the current T2.
Extended 25 format: Extended characters, 25 stars max., no double, equivalent to the current T1.
4/ Several changes will be made on the DT.
- The timer will be significantly reduced for all DT matches. From the first match you'll have the same timer as the one you have now above 100 points.
- We will create a list of penalized characters in DT which will be independent from the list of ELO banned characters. The rule will probably remain the same: -2 points for each penalized character un your 4 characters team. We might change the penalty in the future if necessary.
- T1 and T2 room will be merged in one single room Extended Fights. To allow you to play with 15 to 40 stars decks, the battle system will make you face opponents with similar decks. The DTs will always be in this room.
- There will always be a DT every other our but alternately with the two rooms, Extended and Standard. it means there will be a DT one hour out of 4 in the Extended room and the same in the Standard room.
- We will randomly give a collector to players ranked in the top 150 in DTs. We didn't decide the exact number of collectors yet nor the rules of the draw but we're thinking about 5 collectors a day.
I insist on the fact that with the system of matches against similar decks (which already exists on T1 and T2 rooms) you'll be able to build competitive decks with a small number of stars as you'll always face similar decks. Le big difference is that 25 stars decks will face slightly bigger decks and 26 stars decks will face slightly smaller ones. It doesn't happen now because of the rooms limits which don't match with the way DT decks are built.
5/ We will create two new battle rooms.
- Deathmatch Standard: just like the current DM T2 but with Standard decks.
- Survivor Standard: just like the current Survivor T2 but with Standard decks.
6/ We will also make some minor changes as:
- new packs in the shop with Standard characters only.
- sorting options in the collection to only see Standard characters.
- changes in the theme decks (we are still thinking about it).
- minor changes in the visuals of cards to make Standard characters easier to recognize.
You may notice that ELO won't change at all, the same for DM or Survivor rooms. Of course the Fight Club and the Warehouse won't change either.
About the deadline, with all these changes we cannot be sure it will be released on March. We are working on this project and we want to release it quickly but I can't give a date but it should be implemented before this summer.
You can post comments or send emails here: email@example.com
Thank you and have fun!
I don't see why you want to penalise DR's so much I have won a DT with DR cards in my deck, sometimes they can be used as reverse bluffs to take out your opponents strongest cards, win a fight you would otherwise use. They are part of tactics rather than the dull I have lots of High-power high damage cards to win tactic that is all to common
Why pick on DR surely you can say that most SOA cards are defensive and slow down the game, or SOB and Heal, and at that rate you end up scrapping all abilities and clan bonuses
Very few have won with Pussycats. And most who play them will most likely get some hate messages. And you're right, it does limit them some. But just because they're not playing to win (DTs, not the match) doesn't mean other people aren't. It's just best to avoid using them, it saves both you and the opponent time.
The only way that they're defensive is when they're used to stop +damage abilities I suppose. They play a vital role in the winning department though, DRs don't. Sure DRs can win but the wins are never as satisfying as the losses, however the point in DTs is to inflict damages on the opponent and KO as fast as possible, not stall 2-3 rounds and TKO the opponent with a high damaging card.
No you are missing when they are used to stop cards that poison, give +life, or just to control your opponents move like stopping an opponent play a card like Copper. They are primarily defensive
Winning a DT isn't about inflicting damage and getting through as many matches as you can, you need to take into account round wins star counts beating higher star counts. It is far more complicated than just bashing out the wins as quickly as possible. But playing quickly is important.
You should try to get a more rounded deck then you won't mind playing against clans like PC. Surely opponents dragging out every round is more of a thing to be annoyed about than them throwing out a DR to control the play.
And who plays cards that poison in DTs? LOL, slowly killing off opponents isn't a good strategy in DTs. The ppl who use them are the bad players who also use heavy DRs.
I can understand why some ppl use +life; the bonus points for winning with over 12 life points. It also slows the battle down, but at least they have to win with it. It's something they have to risk.
As to the second paragraph, I know that, and many other players know too. That's why 26* type 2 decks are popular.
@ Lu-Bu. Deathmatch decks are welcome :D, lots of points for a win and even for a loss, usually lots of points when you beat one of their cards with a low star. And they WILL, most of the time, just throw Ambre at you, no pilled, in the second round (non courage round). A 2-3* card beating a 5* gets 5 points, then you get 4 for losing (or 3 if you get kod). That's still fine with me.
Again I had poison in a DT winning deck, its good against heavy DR decks. Personally I think people should be able to play any deck they like I prefer strategic decks with pill manipulation a bit of DR so that you know you can stop the 1hko from Kolos or Dregn (After a C Wing first round) DR is a big part of strategy and should not be penalised to all the dull high power high damage dull decks.
Anyway in my opiinion its about time UR either introduced or better still scrapped Standard so we can see just how much damage it does to the game. I have noticed hardly anyone in my guild are buying credits (There used to be alot) and many have started to move away due to these impending changes, so UR get on with it and the rest of us can decide if its worth staying
1. Like this idea so much better than before. Not saying I love it but is livable now. Before my main problems were lack of diversity (fixed w/ it being optional and 3y) and easy market manipulation (fixed w/ optional, 3y, and new "standard" packs)
2. The only problem is fusing the two DT and making it so we fight whatever star count is close to ours. it removes the "strategy of deck building". 16*/26* decks aren't as useful because we cant fight those higher levels for "greater challenge ,greater reward" or having to squeeze in as much as possible in a 25* deck. I dont know if im just not seeing something but before I fully agree to standard i would like this problem at least adressed.