I've tidied up my proposed solution and changed the thread title to avoid confusion. I've also changed the name of the proposed idea to avoid bickering about tiers.
Solution - Limit System.
- Mark all considered overpowered cards (Toro, Rolph, Smokey Cr, Charlie, etc...) as 'Limited'.
- Add new stipulation to Elo deck build rules:
Your Deck can only contain X Limited cards.
- Limited cards would only be the cards that are considered too powerful. So some clans would not have any Limited cards at all.
- The limited list could rotate, or it could even be placed under player vote.
- This would stop decks being made up with the obvious cards, but would allow us to still play these cards in a limited capacity.
Discuss, feedback, and so on...
The previous thread can be found here: http://www.urban-rivals.com/community/forum/?mode=viewsubject&forum_page=0&id_subject=1529651&subject_page=0
Thank you to everyone who gave feedback.
With the current bans I do know that as I'm playing in elo. However saying that you NEVER get to use them is an overstatement. The reason players like us have the ban voting is to limit cards that have been giving us a problem in elo. Sure toro may be banned for a while but hes not the only great ghiest 4. Same with rolph, wardom can be quite a beast. Making a limited system that allows you to always use one defeats the point of having a player voting system. Just cause cards are banned, doesn't mean that clans now so unusable that they can't win without them is the point I'm getting a across. I used the rolph, toro example because that even tho unlikely it's possible to see both in elo if it does happen its not going to stop people from doing well in elo because there are good players that can beat both even if they are in the same hand.
Again, you miss the point entirely Jin.
With the current system of player bans and staff bans, the chances of being able to use cards such as Toro and Rolph are extremely small. They will see Elo light every now and then if the staff remain true to their words, but seeing as the vote system is running along side the new ban system, when they release toro there's a very high chance he'll be banned by the community.
This limiting system will give you the chance to always play 1-2 of the cards that the new system will ikely keep in the dark for the vast majority of the time.
And I said never and then in brackets put (or it's highly unlikely), so yeh, read more carefully!
"This is not setting more of a limit, it is changing how the limit works"
So like people are allowed to have ratanah or shakra in their deck? That kinda kills elo since one banned card in one deck can cause some mighty destruction. 1 card is all that is needed to destroy other decks. have something like banning the 7 most overused/banned elo cards from clans with more than thirty or more cards + the limit system sounds like it'll work. Clans with fewer cards can have a reduced number of bans. In that case, people would have a hard time choosing from (we'll use Roots for Example) Ratanah, Shakra, Lou, Yookie, Rico, Noodile, Arno (in my Opinion the most overused cards) in one deck where the rule limits how much cards can be chosen. How I see it, using Ratanah and Shakra would increase the solidness in a deck, but choosing the next two solid roots cards clan be a problem.
The number of limited cards allowed needs to be no larger than 2, or it's not going to do anything.
This is much more elegant than your previous proposal, which I found too complex to truly support. I think this is a good way to deal with exceptionally strong, but not totally OP cards like a Toro, Striker or Uranus. Marking especially economical cards like Lehane or Robb in such a way allows them to be used without as many OP high-starred cards being included in the same deck.
I think also something separate needs to be done about EVO cards, either ban them from ELO mode, or let people construct decks using lower levels of cards they have fully-leveled versions of. Wanda and Gwen's current ban especially comes from this, as they have incredible power and damage reduction for 1*. Intermediates looking to increase the size of their collection can't afford to keep replacing these cards as much as people who have the whole set already who funnel all their ELO winnings right back into these cards. OR alter the early stats of the few offensive cards (there really aren't many).
Lastly, Caelus needs a staff ban
That's a good point about semi-evos, but then by removing them you're removing a lot of nuance from the game. I guess it would need to be carefully weighed: the potential imbalance versus the loss of depth. I completely understand what you mean, but I'm not sure which side I fall on.
And yes, I think 2 would be the optimal number.
And Caelus needs a perma gone, no doubt!