> I want to talk about Daily tournaments, the only tournament with no rules, no restrictions and get's no attention.
> I'd like to start by saying tons of people have complained about this specific tournament for many reasons, some being time wasters, others being about running into people who are only doing the tournament to ruin it for others and finally, complaining about the 2 clans who dominate in this tournament, Uppers and Montana.
> This tournament has flaws, and a lot of them.
> Daily tournaments are the only tournaments which can purposely be ruined by other players, it's also the only tournament which contains no specific room for itself, it's also a place where any deck is allowed *But* to come 1st you'll have to use a specific one which will in turn put you at a constant disadvantage to those just playing for 'fun'.
> After placing in top 3, top 5 top 10 and even coming 1st in this tournament it's clear that not much skill is required in this but more luck, luck on who has the less time wasters, the less 40* crushing decks and the less people purposely ruining the game for others in the tournament.
> I really feel there is no argument on this discussion, but any input you have will also be taken into consideration.
> What do I hope to become of this? For the staff to completely rework DT's.
> Finally, I've posted this in general because it's the only topic anyone comes to, plus it's a general problem.
Banning cards in DTs is a big no for me. Banning cards is the reason more than a few people dislike the living 'something' out of elo. Maybe if it's only those crs and leaders it's acceptable. Otherwise, I'd hate to see any banning happen.
Rest of your post I think would help greatly improve DTs and have no major issues with.
I agree with what m-bison is saying about a separate room completely, definitely needs its own room, because people just go into fights type 1 and 2 because it just seems like a organized fight club.
i also think that the penalty on points that you get for using elo banned cards is a good start, but it needs to be weighted. like jackie cr should not be only a -2 point penalty. meanwhile, cards like rowdy and striker could get less of a penalty, maybe -1 only?
definitely needs bans as well. not the same as elo bans, more like banning bridget and graksmxxt and uranus and even non elo banned cards like dwan. because if someone is purposely using those cards to stall, obviously they wouldn't care about any kind of penalty.
Fisheatdog them type of bans are exactly what I'm talking about, Bridget would be a permo ban, Graksmxxt and Uranus could easily go same with Dwan, Arno, just cards like them really being banned really change the room itself.
Obviously I'm not saying ''BAN ALL DRS THEY SLOW ME DOWN AHHHHH!!'' I'm saying certain cards are really not for DTs and 9/10 people using them aren't in the DT to place or are doing it purposely.
I'd love to Jackie cr go, or do what you should of done years ago, make it a 5*.
To make it most fair, limit the amount of battles per tournament. 10 sounds like enough. 6 minutes per battle, until you reach 100 pts, then it goes faster.
I'm against bans though... As long as ELO penalty is there. DTs are all about speed, and Kolos/Jackie users usually try to K.O. you. Now, let's say someone has 2 banned cards. He would think twice about it, because if on average 1 appears in a hand, that guy just lost 20 points and he won't have an additional battle to catch up
Also no to custom deck mode with custom star limit. If you have a 26* deck in T2, you are at advantage if you beat 40*, but it's difficult. That's the risk you have to take if you're trying to win this way.
I think most people saw bans and instantly thought 'omfg getting rid of strong cards'
That isn't the case, the bans would be focused on cards that stall DT's a lot and cards that are to good for star count.
'' If you have a 26* deck in T2, you are at advantage if you beat 40*''
There isn't an advantage anywhere, we have a lower star hand, worse cards, lower power and damage, if we win it's because we out played or got lucky on our opponent. That all depends on what there hand is of course but I'm talking about the common 40* OP hands in T2.
''That's the risk you have to take if you're trying to win this way.''
It's the only way to win, I'm pretty sure 100% no one has won using a 40* deck, this is what I mean by the point system, you need to design your deck to have low star hands and because of how the DT is set up you can go against anything, it's beyond unfair.
Still love you botshot just thought I'd explain stuff.
Wouldn't that also mean banning clans like jungo and pussycats? personally, I'm a skeelz, sakhrom/junkz, piranas, and berzerk/fpc, with each deck requires different setup and strategy. a skeelz deck with greem and snowflake can get to the top 100, but probably won't win the dt, but these deck setup is cheap especially for those that just started to play the game and trying to get as many clintz and credit as possible.
Oh my.. this is the first time I've ever seen M-bison make a serious thread
on the serious note:
make separate room if you want the changes especially banning rules.
for example: DT room T1 & T2 or DT room only (with 30* like you suggest)
however, keep T1 and T2 available as DT room too
don't touch the T1 and T2, they are good as it is
and I play for fun, not for DT (well sometimes I played for 1 credits)
I used what I liked, T1 and T2 is the only place I can use my best (aka overpower and overpriced) card
I have vickie cr and I cannot use her in normal room?? lol..
I said "advantage IF you beat 40*". So, if you do beat them, you get moar points - advantage
I don't think that's the only way to win, but the best one. However, you are right about how it's all based on luck
Maybe just make separate tournaments for t1 and t2? That way t1 people won't get beaten by 26* t2 player
Side note: has anyone tried
"Oh my.. this is the first time I've ever seen M-bison make a serious thread"
Mhm. His account must have been stolen.
I can generally join into the tournament being, in the end, luck in not getting stallers and quitters. I do not even try - failing based on OTHERS as opposed to myself or to randomness ("luck" tends to frustrate me.
But the problem with rules here is: They need to stay simple. Overly complex rules (5 different penalty points for different cards or example) won't really help but cause more new problems. No, I do not have an ingenious idea, apart from saving player's time-to-play-turns, and selecting "do not allow players below N% Fairness / over :N seconds per turn"... but that causes other problems.
I suggested that months ago (maybe even a year now :/ ), weighted penalties will make for much more diverse DTs; but even more importantly it needs to be completely separated from the ELO bans since ELO has moved on to 14 life. This way we can even penalize a card like Mona (even if it's only -1) who is extremely strong and efficient in the DT game mode.
The staff implemented the version of quickbattle which chose players with similar deck builds / positioning in the tournament, but it seems like this hasn't been done properly if the majority of battles are luck-based. If the above changes were made (and thus players trying to win the DTs were all playing different clans and builds) then this should make each battle fun, skill based and still possible to score well.
It also seems from your original post that you are completely ignoring T1 DTs, where you will typically face 13* to 14* (assuming a pretty regular build) and thus reducing the luck factor. Remember, as more and more cards are released the strength and playability of 16* - 18* decks increases