I am interested, though the format above seems to be getting a little complex...
|
NA Hearthstone Tournament
|
|
It's no more complex than what was originally posted or what was used in the EU tournament. It's just less vaguely described.
Am I reading wrong Seven that you want the winner to switch decks? Doesn't the EU tournament have the loser switch?
March 5th, 2015, 13:43
(This post was last modified: March 5th, 2015, 13:44 by SevenSpirits.)
 (March 5th, 2015, 12:34)sunrise089 Wrote: Am I reading wrong Seven that you want the winner to switch decks? Doesn't the EU tournament have the loser switch? The EU tournament went with the format where the winner must keep the same deck, and the loser's deck is eliminated so they must pick a different deck. The format Ichabod proposed has the winner's deck being eliminated, and both players choosing freely from their remaining decks. The former format tends to be about having counters to decks and picking your counter decks into the decks they counter. That is a reason why I don't like it as much (although like I said, my main objection is the ban aspect). The latter format tends to be more about making sure all three of your decks are solid, though there are also undertones of wanting to play three similar decks so that your opponent is more likely to have a deck that fails against all three. That's why the third format I mentioned, where you just play three decks against three enemy decks and then blind pick, is my favorite. It calls for three solid decks that are ideally diverse. Actually, I think this one might be my favorite, though I am not aware of a tournament that used it - it just occurred to me as a simplification of the one I just mentioned. * You bring (up to) 3 decks. * Each game you get to pick one of your decks with no restrictions. * Best of 5.
Guys, I won't have time to decently play this without messing up with my other commitments in the forum (I'm trying not to keep messing with my PBEM opponents), so I have to retract my sign up.
I promise to watch the avaiable games and comment on how easily I'd have beaten you, though. 
Depending on the timing (if I have a scheduling conflict, it usually is only a day or two delay), I would like to play. I actually like SevenSpirits's proposal a lot, as I have a severe lack of updated decks (and some important missing cards, mostly legends). I would like a minimum few days notice before we begin, however, as I am fairly rusty and even my traditionally mained deck needs updating.
Merovech's Mapmaking Guidelines:
(March 5th, 2015, 13:43)SevenSpirits Wrote: Actually, I think this one might be my favorite, though I am not aware of a tournament that used it - it just occurred to me as a simplification of the one I just mentioned. The potential problem I see with this format is that we are likely going to see players using their "best" deck for all 5 games, which can lead to matches that feel repetitive. Although we can give it a try if everyone's ok with that. (March 6th, 2015, 19:13)Gawdzak Wrote:(March 5th, 2015, 13:43)SevenSpirits Wrote: Actually, I think this one might be my favorite, though I am not aware of a tournament that used it - it just occurred to me as a simplification of the one I just mentioned. I see it as a plus, as it means that people who only really have or want to play one deck can do so. You still get an advantage from using all three of your available decks: if you play the same deck repeatedly, your opponent has information about your list, and has their pick out of three decks to counter it. But I'm not attached to it if someone doesn't like it. |
