Hello all !
Veterans are well aware that we have always wanted the ELO to be both a highly strategic and very open game mode. Our desire to have as many strategic options as possible has lead us to revise the ELO mode rules several times. First of all, we created the list of banned characters gathering those who appeared to be most abused. This list enabled us to solve the main balance issues.
Next, however, the metagame gradually crystallized around the two or three dominant clans at the time. In order to prevent the metagame from stagnating, we then introduced a ban on the clan having dominated the previous week. Unfortunately, this course of action did not work as well as we had hoped. Though it provided a certain variety among the clans used to play, it mostly led up to a very negative feature: the "cycling" phenomenon that we are currently experiencing between Roots and Sentinel (and also All Stars for good measure). In addition, the ban of an entire clan is too drastic an initiative.
Frankly, I would prefer a situation where the old cards get played again to the current one. AND I still think Lehane should NEVER have been made and perma-banned in ANY case. But point is: my suggestion was not in ny way meant as a good suggestion to generally be implemented. I still hold it is BETTER than the above "ignore consensus every x weeks by disallowing to vote on a card" or "make voting more expensive".
This weeks ongoing vote is interesting. Lower scoring players are voting Kolos out in droves, letting higher scoring players protect Zatman, Smokey and Lehane. I don't know if this is a sign that higher scoring players should be getting more votes - they're at least acting rationally and casting votes on cards important to the meta game - or a sign that everyone's votes need to be equalized.
I wonder if a better way to solve this would be simply making decks with more commonly used cards simply collected less points for a win then cards that were less commonly chsen for decks? It would be inspiration to intentionally try to not be using the same cards as everyone else. It wouldn't stop cards from being used - everyone would be able to use anything - but the most commonly used (especially abused) cards would offer less reward while winning with a more abstract deck would garner a good reward provided they can win with it.
In other words if someone decided to use Kolos and Zatman and Dorian and whomever else is considered broken then depending how oftenly used the overall deck is at the moment they may end up having to win three or four battles to make what someone using something rarely used at the time.
Of course this would affect even the non-broken cards that are commonly used. Such as starter cards. So people would have to practically rebuild the deck structure if they wanted to maximize efficiency and creativity.