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.
If the big guilds do keep "abusive and expensive" cards in play how is that different than them being in play every other week right now? i know it would make them playable every week but i think that we are all making to many assumptions only after a couple days of this being in affect. also don't forget that new cards are always coming out. if you wanted to play sentinels in elo months ago you would've been laughed at. then in one release they get hawk and lehane and become a powerhouse. the same could happen with another clan. so until we have a good basis of information to go on all this is speculation. now to do a bit of speculation on my own i don't see carpet bombing campaings to be affective. if the guild or high ranking players wait to the last min to put there votes in they risk a couple of things. first someone waiting till the last min to vote the other way. and second since the actual number of votes for or against is kept secret they won't know how many votes it would take to "flip" a card from one status to another. they could put all there votes on keeping a banned hawk for example and reliaze after they waste all there votes that they come up short. also you are assuming that all the higher level elo players are wanting to use cards like hawk in there deck week after week. i know alot of people who change there deck after a certain elo ranking. and if you change it you need different cards so having one card unbanned or banned doesn't help
Question: Percentage of Participation - does it mean votes out of the number of all possible votes? Players of all that have at least one vote that have used one vote? ...that have used all their votes?
Intuitively I'd suppose the first option but I am not quite sure.
I still think the obvious solution is to try to balance every clan as much as possible, which can be done. As grizden stated Sentinel where awful now they are too powerful so lesser clans can be improved, Sentinal went to far. I just wish that effort had been put into balancing the decks rather than what I feel are cosmetic changes ( I Acept I could be proved wrong). Maybe new versions of Fang Pi's collector cards could be released to make them competative, and similar measures for other lesser clans.
I also don't see how if there is a problem with Sentinel being too strong removing one of their characters from the banned list helps?
Ok....Lets see from the first votes what happens.
1.you CANNOT BLOCK or retalliate powerfull cards with low star cards (Leviatton , Toro OUT)
2.you CANNOT manipulate pills with low star cards in order to avoid 2round KO (smokey, Hawkins OUT)
3.in fact the only defence you got is using the sakrom defence(petra.wakai,uranus,Murray)
and I thought it was a strategy card game and not stronges(most expensive)t-card-wins type of game....
not to mention the highly democratic way of disributing the votes since the winner Decks will ALLWAYS BAN the mediocre ones.. thks alot!!!!!!!!!