offline ghelas Titan E X C A L I B U R
Monday 29/04/2013, 12:42

I'd like to make a suggestion regarding ELO mode.

Even though ELO is, in a way, more balanced than ever before, I think there is still a pretty big issue. A lot of clans have too many cards that are good in fairly random ways, sometimes countering the opponent's hand by chance instead of design. While the most powerful cards like Kalindra get ELO banned rather fast, the slightly OP counter-cards created to deal with them remain...

The result is that clans have less of an identity than ever, power creep is becoming more prominent, and the meta feels less focused than before the last wave of perma-bans. FPC does SoB better than Piranas. Sakrohm have a recently released 4* that's better than a recently released Skeelz 5*. And so on...

I think Standard was an attempt to solve this exact issue, and I can now see the need for a solution along those lines. However, I think there is a far more eloquent way to implement it.

Here's my idea:

-A ranked mode, similar to ELO.
-Only 8 clans playable per week, 5 chosen at random and 3 chosen by player vote.
-ELO banned cards, both temp and perma, not playable in this mode.
-To give players incentive to play both ELO and the new mode, increase rewards for players outside of T100 in both modes. smiley

What does everyone think? Would this be a good play mode to see? Any issues, suggestions, feedback of any kind? Very eager to hear if ELO regulars would enjoy this mode.

offline ghelas Titan E X C A L I B U R
Friday 03/05/2013, 08:50

Ehh, I don't mind change in and of itself. But every card is content. They all have pretty art and backstories. Some of them have stats that are too strong and some of them have stats that are no longer relevant. But UR and FR are virtual game. Unlike in a physical card game such as Magic, you can easily change what a card does to make it more balanced or more relevant.

As for FR, it's not done yet. There will be new modes, rumor has it there will even be 2v2 gameplay at some point. Cards that cycle out of FR's Standard will hopefully still be playable in some mode or another. Otherwise, you have content that was paid for and developed, sitting around, doing virtually nothing... And a bunch of players wishing they had some use for these virtual scraps of paper they've collected.

If nothing else, that just seems wasteful. I really think physical card games only do it because regularly changing existing cards isn't feasible for them.

offline wasteroftime Titan Open Casket
Friday 03/05/2013, 22:27

But you dont really collect ghelas, ofcourse you see the virtual goods as something that virtually does nothing. no way you really know the motivation without doing it

it would be like me trying to imagine what top 100 in elo is like now with scores as low as 1380 -- i am not in a position to comment on people's motivation on that. i can imagine it, but i really dont know what that is like right now

it would be like you trying to comment on what ELO used to be like, you can comment, but without being there for it, you were not in the position to know what that was really like.

no they change to keep the game fresh. they are profit driven. they want to avoid stagnation. they want new people to not get stomped early so they stick around and spend more. they will lose old people, but they want as many of those old people to stay and keep spending. and yes i would be in a position to comment on how that was.

offline ghelas Titan E X C A L I B U R
Friday 03/05/2013, 22:48

A flawed argument, sir. When a card becomes obsolete, the content provided by that card is effectively reduced. The fact that some people may enjoy the simple act of owning the card doesn't really negate that.

Outside of certain kinds of player events, I have no reason to discuss the strategic merits of Yumi, or put her into any of my decks. I've glanced at her art once or twice. But give her 7 power, or change her Confidence to a better condition, and she suddenly becomes relevant again. She would even be fair as a Courage: +14 attack: a slightly better Toliver with 1 less damage. Now she becomes the subject of discussion, more people want to buy her, more people want to slot her into all different kinds of decks.

Rather long-winded way to make my point, I guess, but what I'm trying to say is that changes can be constructive rather than destructive, and that serves the game by making content more relevant in general.

Answer to this subject

Clint City, night.