Close

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1
    Member Durfs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    89
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Talking Sideboard for SE and Rated/Unrated Match Option

    Rated/Unrated Match: Three games will be played to determine the winner, instead of a single game. The player that wins 2 out of the 3 games first is declared the victor. After games 1 and 2 are played, the sideboard is allowed.

    Sideboard: 10-15 cards separate from the deck, these cards may be swapped with an equal number of cards from your deck after the first and second games.
    A sideboard would be an excellent addition for Shadow Era, many TCGs (MTG, Yugioh, etc.) have already implemented one and it allows innovation, strategy, and flexibility in deck building. The sideboard is utilized to counter specific match ups that are near impossible to win.
    Ex. Game 1- Lance vs Moonstalker and Moonstalker wins, Game 2- Lance takes 3 nowhere to hide from his sideboard and swaps them with 3 stop thief from his deck to counter Moonstalker's shadow ability. Lance wins game 2 with the help from nowhere to hide. Game 3- Moonstalker notices Lance's nowhere to hide from game 2 and decides to add in regeneration to counter nowhere to hide. Moonstalker wins game 3.
    As Shadow Era increases it's card pool the possibilities for side board options become endless, many unused cards now find value in the sideboard and deck engineering with a sideboard adds an entirely new aspect to the world of Shadow Era.


    The Rated/Unrated match feature and the sideboard will expand the game, not only competitively, but also allow future development to be constructed around these ideas.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    763
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I think this would be great, it is so hard to fit cards into 40 card decks now a days. I also think a mulligan option would be good to have less games where someone either quits too early or plays the game out with really bad starting hands.

  3. #3
    Senior Member jonmaciel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States (GMT-4)
    Posts
    1,856
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Don't think you could reasonably do 3 games instead of 1 in QM. can't expect people to want to sit for 30-40 min for one qm match.

    But when in-game tournament options are added, I support having a way to enable a tournament that wants to allow sideboards!

    I still object to mulligans - its like a reward for someone who didn't build a consistent deck or a deck with enough options.
    IGN: TJ jonmaciel
    TG: @jonmaciel

    Elder, Mentoring Officer


    ShadowEra.Net Editor

  4. #4
    Member Durfs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    89
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Starval,
    The match feature is an alternative to the single rated/unrated game, it will not remove any of Shadow Era's current gameplay options.

    If match is added, when entering the challenge screen to battle an opponent, the player would be able to click on "Rated" or "Unrated" and choose between "Single" or "Match".
    In "Match", players would be rewarded the usual exp/gold/score for a single win. If a player wins 2 of 3 games, he/she receives exp/gold/score for both of the wins. The time required to complete 2 out of 3 games would be no different than the time necessary to finish 2 single games in QM. The only exceptions would be, now you are facing the same opponent twice in a row and the time between games to swap cards from sideboard (switching cards from sideboard and deck can have a set time limit also to allow players from stalling gameplay).

  5. #5
    Member Durfs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    89
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I do not favor mulligans, shreds deck building to pieces when deck inconsistency problems can be resolved with a single mulligan.
    Strategy > Chance

  6. #6
    Senior Member Daemon Rayge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The New England Frost
    Posts
    2,345
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Durfs View Post
    I do not favor mulligans, shreds deck building to pieces when deck inconsistency problems can be resolved with a single mulligan.
    Strategy > Chance
    Even the most consistent Decks can sometimes hit rough patches. If your Deck is constantly inconsistent, even with a mulligan, then it's inconsistent. If it's inconsistent half the time, you still have a good chance of mulligan of a hand just as bad or worse.

    Plus, the whole chance thing is always in play. What you are perceiving as good Deck building is still on the lines of building around giving you the best possible chance.
    I like my weapons how I like my music. Heavy and metal!
    -Mordekaiser

    Writer of Falseblood Cultist and Thriss Crucible flavor texts.

  7. #7
    Chat Mod Ross013's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Wales, UK (GMT +1)
    Posts
    695
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Durfs View Post
    I do not favor mulligans, shreds deck building to pieces when deck inconsistency problems can be resolved with a single mulligan.
    Strategy > Chance
    But mulligans help eliminate the chance element. If both players are starting with what they perceive to be the best starting hand, then the game becomes about who has the better strategy. If you beat somebody cause they had a janky opener and you didn't, that's not because your strategy was better, or even that you have a more consistent deck, it's because chance made it so that you would have the advantage
    Ross014 - Intrepid Learner of Secrets
    Warrior of the Blue Pheonix
    Greatness, Reborn

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    763
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I don't know the statistics of it but if you have a well made deck you should be at advantage against a badly made deck over a large sample of games in both having no mulligan and having a mulligan. It would only be one off games where you get surprisingly beaten but that can already happen if they luck into a good hand for their first hand.

  9. #9
    Senior Member jonmaciel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States (GMT-4)
    Posts
    1,856
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Lets not get sidetracked here and stick to talking about the match feature. mulligans have been discussed for a long time, and the thread is still open that Kyle started last summer: http://www.shadowera.com/showthread.php?31051-Mulligans

    As for the 3-game match feature, I state again, how many people are really going to sit through that on a consistent basis in QM to say its worth coding? Would that time be better suited coding it into a tournament feature and would it be more used as a tournament feature? Yes to both on the ladder is what I think we all come to.
    IGN: TJ jonmaciel
    TG: @jonmaciel

    Elder, Mentoring Officer


    ShadowEra.Net Editor

  10. #10
    Member Durfs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    89
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Mulligans in a TCG with a 40 card minimum is bad for the game. Rush builds receive a boost to start with their "God Hand", and players going first now have the option to apply more advantage over there opponent.
    If you notice, MTG has a mulligan, but the minimum deck size is 60 cards. This substantially increases the percentage of an insignificant starting hand.
    Is starting with an absolutely terrible hand 1/20 games played really that severe? (1/20 games, if that, are the number of times I experience these mulligan moment sad hands)
    My question is this, what decks are you playing that continually start with an unplayable hand?

    Starval, what is the time difference in playing a 3-game match with sideboard vs 3 single games? The only time difference is the time it takes for the players to move cards from their sideboard into the deck, between games 2 and 3. When moving cards from sideboard, there would be a 1min30sec or 2 min time limit to eliminate stalling between games.
    The creation of best 2/3 match feature would not be difficult; after players have completed game 1 and the defeat or victory message pops up, instead of being lead back to the screen to find a battle like SE games now, the players would move to a screen similar to the deck building screen (sideboard screen), where one is able to click and drag cards purchased from the merchant to the deck and vise versa.
    Sideboard screen - this would have your deck cards above and your sideboard cards below just as the deck building screen has the deck above and merchant cards below.
    Ready Button - there would be a button at the bottom right of the sideboard screen that reads "Ready", this is clicked after the player has finished moving sideboard cards to deck. When both players have clicked the ready button, the next game begins.
    1min30sec-2min timer - this timer would be positioned at the bottom left of the sideboard screen. It would start at either 1min30sec or 2min and decrease until it hit 0. Once it hits 0, the game is automatically started whether the player has finished using sideboard or not.
    Keep in mind, most players will not require the full amount of time.

    Most tournaments use best 2/3 with sideboard for rules, so this would be perfect as a function for tournaments.
    A player would go to the unrated section for match and create a game, just as players do now for pop-ups and such.
    Last edited by Durfs; 07-26-2015 at 07:28 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •