Why should lower star cards have the advantage in Elo mode in a tie situation? I can understand giving them a leg up in Type 2 play, but there's no reason for type 1/Elo to do so.
Limiting the star count of your deck to 25 is enough, giving low star cards an auto-win in a tie situation just makes it hard to use 4 and 5 star cards.
This is an extra reason why Elo is dominated by 3 star cards. I feel so unsafe using a 4 or 5 star card in Elo knowing that in a tie I have a 50% chance to lose vs another 4/5 star and a 100% chance to lose vs anything else.
To add on what mr intelijent said (as i completely agree with everything he said ) the reason why elo is dominated by 3 star cards is because you simply have no room to put a lot of 4 star cards and 5 stars so yeah . and also just play the game is it that hard :S wouldn't there be like million of this threads if this rule was bad , and also don't tie you can probably add to around 50 - 60 pill so you don't get tied lol
I couldn't agree more. The way in which ties are resolved disgusts me. I thought maybe, in the event of a tie attack score, perhaps the dmg from the cards could be added and then distributed evenly...or something. I don't know, I don't have a real solution, just the same complaint as you.
I don't want to lose matches that way anymore, and if a suitable solution is presented, I wouldn't mind not winning matches that way either.
@Carnage-Time: No, Sliman is easily countered by SoA or a damage reducer. And to fit that 5 star card in your deck you're forced to add 2 star cards obviously, which is why Elo mode is balanced already without this tie rule.
Player 1 with 3 five star cards and 5 two star cards will lose more than 50% of the time against Player 2 with 7 three star cards and 1 with four stars. But one main disadvantage of using 5 star cards is that the enemy knows if he just uses a damage reducer or wins against the 5 star, then even losing against two of the 2 star cards won't leave a big dent in his health.
-A deck full of 3 star cards has bluffing ability, while the guy with 5 and 2 stars has an obvious strategy. Win with your 5 star - the enemy knows which card he has to beat or reduce its damage.
- There's a chance that Player 1 will get a draw of 8 stars occasionally too, while the lowest Player 2 can have is 12 stars. Player 1 almost always loses when he draws 8 stars.
-When he has 1-2 five star cards the enemy can predict his strategy easily. He's not going to bluff with his 6-8 damage power hitter and then use his pills on a 2 star for 2-4 damage...It's too easy to counter the enemy when you know exactly what they'll do. Then if the enemy does try to low pill on his 5 star you win if it's a tie because the game is set up in your favor. It is nearly impossible to thrive in Elo with Player 1's deck, TRY IT AND SEE!
You seem to have conflicting arguments. You say that low stars shouldn't win ties, then say a deck with 5 and 2 stars will usually lose because low stars will beat their predictable 5. But then couldn't you just do that back with your 2 stars and beat all his higher stars with ties?
Really your problem seems to be that unbalanced decks suck compared to balanced ones. To which I say: "DUH".
What kind of deck do you use? Is it the one that your Player 1 is using? Maybe you should try switching to a more balanced deck? Perhaps a 55333222 split? Those can be very powerful with strong 3 and 5 stars. Or maybe a 44433322. If your current strategy isn't working, maybe YOU should change it instead of complaining and saying UR should change.
I can do it with 2 5*, and quite constantly (I used to be able to do it with 554 as well, but not tried it since Yayoi is banned)
I know the tied rule is arbitrary, but as long as it is simple and applies across the board, I don't see a problem.
Its like the Plus before Minus rule, why? It is simple and applies fairly.
"A deck full of 3 star cards has bluffing ability, while the guy with 5 and 2 stars has an obvious strategy. Win with your 5 star - the enemy knows which card he has to beat or reduce its damage."
And this is why you're highest ELO is 1100 lol. Most decks go 1 5*, 2 4*'s, 2 3*'s, 3 2*s. I would love to play against you in ELO, throw out an 8 dmg card with 1 pill, let you dmg reduce it and get 5 dmg with 1 pill. That makes my life easy. SLiman is stopped by SOA as an ability only. You might have one of those per hand. And if you are facing Sliman, opponent is likely using pirhanas, meaning they can have Scubb/Cooleridge/Tula/Ector/Taljion Who does you use the SOA against?
I bluff with my 5* quites often, Herman and Nellie make very nice bluffs, through 1 pill on them and opponent has to use 4/5 to beat them. And if you don't pill i just got 3-5 free dmg. Then i use cards like Jessie (AS 2 dmg and +2 life) she's a 2*. Bianca brings cards to her power and then down by 10, causing you to have to at least 2 pill to beat her. Yesterday i played Biance (no one expects pill on Bianca first round right? I played 5) Oppenent played Kenny with 4. I just took out their biggest threat with my weakest threat. Easy game from there on out.
That's why deck configuration is important. A 5-5-5-2-2-2-2-2 deck is unreliable and everyone knows that, its also "impossible" to be achieved in a mono deck making it even shakier. 4-3-3-3-3-3-3-3 isn't popular and can't be achieved in a mono deck as well, also barely a good one in dual. The way you made up these scenarios with these 2 deck configurations in mind, just makes me think you really aren't familiar with ELO (and neither am I).
"He's not going to bluff with his 6-8 damage power hitter and then use his pills on a 2 star for 2-4 damage... "
I don't know, isn't that what bluffing is all about? Then I barely understand the followups.
It can be unfair, I agree. I also believe there's no possible way to make the game totally fair in all situations.
@ Not Sober, I bet countless times you've won because of the current tie system. Right now its probably the most balanced, allowing for lower star decks (meaning the lower level players) to destroy a deck of 2 5*'s 1 4* and 1 3*.
Of course with a hand like that you'd expect to destroy a player with only 2 stars, which is probably true.