Jump to content
Karmo

Swapping decks isn't fun in archon

Recommended Posts

I just played a tournament where you swap decks after the first game. Wow, very few enjoyed this. If you lose with your own deck then you have the chance to either beat your own deck or win with a deck you'll never play with again. When you win with the opponent's deck you feel bad for your own and it feels like any preparation was a waste. It might as well just be sealed then. I really like the spirit of each deck is unique and putting thought and time into unlocking the potential of each deck but swapping game 2 to me violates that idea.   The gameplay slows down(because your trying to learn how to play this new deck) to the point where the 3rd game never finishes and you win or lose because you have a few more or less amber at a certain point.  It doesn't feel good either way. I'd rather play best of 1 and more rounds or best of three with my own and there's some way to apply chains after game 1.  Just my thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the opposite reaction. Played in an Adaptive tournament on Friday and everyone seemed to enjoy it. Swapping decks meant that you could play a lot of different types of decks during the day and it didn't feel like the winner was just the person who happened to open the strongest deck. Definitely my favorite format so far

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Adaptive is one of the most balanced formats I’ve ever seen in a card game, I think. I very much like it from that standpoint.

Having said that, I still have problems with other people playing my decks, even if they are only $10 a piece. I tried it the other day with a friend and immediately he rips a sleeve and I cringe and feel uncomfortable the whole time. It’s not a format for me probably, which is a shame, because I like it in theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Palpster said:

Adaptive is one of the most balanced formats I’ve ever seen in a card game, I think. I very much like it from that standpoint.

Having said that, I still have problems with other people playing my decks, even if they are only $10 a piece. I tried it the other day with a friend and immediately he rips a sleeve and I cringe and feel uncomfortable the whole time. It’s not a format for me probably, which is a shame, because I like it in theory.

Ultra Pro?

I always side-shuffle, and for some reason those sleeves with printed art on the back catch real easy for me.

Edited by WonderWAAAGH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a variation on the bad deck format.  This format involves making a deck for your opponent to play.  It usually has very strict deck building rules.  Keyforge's fixed deck could avoid this.  But its not a popular format overall, because human are too possessive of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see how the adaptive variant would be less fun for the Archon format. The OP has a great point in that the preparation that went into learning the deck you bring should be rewarded with actually getting to play it for the duration of the tournament.

However, I’d like to point out that the adaptive variant itself isn’t necessarily the problem in that scenario, but rather combining it with the Archon format. I’ve found that the adaptive variant of sealed formats is quite a lot of fun for all the reasons that @DacoTrilar pointed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the biggest draw to this game for me will be ideas like this. My biggest concern will be a competitive seen that makes top tier deck all chase decks, and make it no fun for anyone that doesn't have one of those decks. Blind seal play would be fun, if FFG got its **** together and made a solid handicap system for brand new pulled decks. I think the master vault has the potential to do this kind of thing. 

But another cool idea, playing for pink slips. Meaning, a tournament that you are playing for ownership of your deck. SO do you want to bring your best most favorite deck, and a chance to lose it? or be a bit less risky and play with a slightly less good deck. It could be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, msieder said:

But another cool idea, playing for pink slips. Meaning, a tournament that you are playing for ownership of your deck. SO do you want to bring your best most favorite deck, and a chance to lose it? or be a bit less risky and play with a slightly less good deck. It could be interesting.

I read that and my eyes went wide at the possibility while at the same time I cringed. That's a bold idea but I am not sure I could bring myself to do it! Chills.

I think I'd have to water it down for myself to a kind of format where if you lose with a deck it is "locked out" of the rest of the tournament and the next one too. Similar enough that a lot is on the line without the anxiety of losing decks I really like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheSpitfired said:

I read that and my eyes went wide at the possibility while at the same time I cringed. That's a bold idea but I am not sure I could bring myself to do it! Chills.

I think I'd have to water it down for myself to a kind of format where if you lose with a deck it is "locked out" of the rest of the tournament and the next one too. Similar enough that a lot is on the line without the anxiety of losing decks I really like.

High risk. High reward. :)     

 

Id prob mitigate it a bit though. Like the first two rounds will seed you, so the weaker players don't lose their deck in the first round or two. Then the middle rounds your decks are at risk. And then maybe the final 4 or something get to keep their decks, and of course, all the decks they collected as bounties...   :)  

 

Edited by msieder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, msieder said:

High risk. High reward. :)     

 

Id prob mitigate it a bit though. Like the first two rounds will seed you, so the weaker players don't lose their deck in the first round or two. Then the middle rounds your decks are at risk. And then maybe the final 4 or something get to keep their decks, and of course, all the decks they collected as bounties...   :)  

 

I would only do this if it was a sealed deck tournament.  So the deck I am losing is the one I bought in to play with.  I would not want to lose one if my decks that I previously owned this way. I’m stupidly attached to them for no real reason...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Karmo said:

I just played a tournament where you swap decks after the first game. Wow, very few enjoyed this. If you lose with your own deck then you have the chance to either beat your own deck or win with a deck you'll never play with again. When you win with the opponent's deck you feel bad for your own and it feels like any preparation was a waste. It might as well just be sealed then. I really like the spirit of each deck is unique and putting thought and time into unlocking the potential of each deck but swapping game 2 to me violates that idea.   The gameplay slows down(because your trying to learn how to play this new deck) to the point where the 3rd game never finishes and you win or lose because you have a few more or less amber at a certain point.  It doesn't feel good either way. I'd rather play best of 1 and more rounds or best of three with my own and there's some way to apply chains after game 1.  Just my thoughts.

What "Preparation" did do and waste?  And you feel bad for your deck?  You know you deck doesn't have feelings that are hurt if its owner beats it right?

If game play slows down while a player reviews a card they have never seen before that is to be expected, but it shouldn't be significant.  By game 3 it should speed up because no matte which deck you are using, you have just played it recently.  As time goes on and people start memorizing cards this won't be as much of an issue.  If the game really slows, call a TO and ask your opponent to play quicker.

IF you are the type who can't stand to have someone else touch your stuff, I get it.  Most people are respectful of others decks and such.  But I have played games against people that seem intent on destroying their cards by the end of the game, or hold them in such a death grip that all the cards are bowed.  I wouldn't want them playing my deck for sure.  But on the whole, I find people will trreat your stuff with care.. especially when you are sitting directly across from them holding their deck at the same time.

But this post mostly seems to be the the OP doesn't like being forced to use an unfamiliar deck.  Which either means they can't play a deck off the cuff and adapt without multiple games, which is a big part of Keyforge.  Or they want to be able to come into a tourney with hammer of a deck and cruise through without having to worry about balance.  But balance is also a big part of Keyforge.  The good news here is that if you deck is a unusually powerful deck, you have a big advantage in knowing its true power and should be able to big chains appropriately to get it back for the win or force your opponent to overbid for the loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I gather from the post, and I completely agree that Adaptive is flawed in its current state:

The part that makes adaptive fun is you get to find out if it is the player or the deck that is better.  If one player wins two games, they are the better (or luckier) player.  If after two games each player has a win, that deck is most likely a stronger deck (or again lucky, but luck can't really be mitigated). The issue is the third game in this format. 

Single game rounds are 35 minutes when you know the deck.  Sealed rounds are 45 minutes each meaning it is expected to take longer to play a deck you don't know.  By this math the adaptive rounds should be 2 hours 5 minutes, not 90 minutes.  Only getting to play against 2 opponents, which doesn't really give a good tournament, is 4 hours, for a card game.  I play in the middle of the week regularly so 4 hours is a long commitment to basically be playing twice.  Yes I will have the opportunity to get in 4-6 games, but the reality is that I've seen only 3 decks, including my own, in that time.

What I see as the bigger problem, is the chains are introduced in the final game, which is regularly going to be rushed and the round will be ended in the middle of the game.  If there is a deck that is powerful, and you get to the game where you have bid really high chains to be able to play the powerful deck, it is really defeating to win by current amber state, or lose for that matter.  The final game that is supposed to be the definitive answer to who is the better player, is rushed to an end.

In bigger tournaments, where it is expected I will play all day, I think this is a great format, but the time needs to be addressed so the third game isn't rushed.  Maybe play each game in a set of 35 minutes so that the final round always has 35 minutes available to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, backupsidekick said:

Here's what I gather from the post, and I completely agree that Adaptive is flawed in its current state:

The part that makes adaptive fun is you get to find out if it is the player or the deck that is better.  If one player wins two games, they are the better (or luckier) player.  If after two games each player has a win, that deck is most likely a stronger deck (or again lucky, but luck can't really be mitigated). The issue is the third game in this format. 

Single game rounds are 35 minutes when you know the deck.  Sealed rounds are 45 minutes each meaning it is expected to take longer to play a deck you don't know.  By this math the adaptive rounds should be 2 hours 5 minutes, not 90 minutes.  Only getting to play against 2 opponents, which doesn't really give a good tournament, is 4 hours, for a card game.  I play in the middle of the week regularly so 4 hours is a long commitment to basically be playing twice.  Yes I will have the opportunity to get in 4-6 games, but the reality is that I've seen only 3 decks, including my own, in that time.

What I see as the bigger problem, is the chains are introduced in the final game, which is regularly going to be rushed and the round will be ended in the middle of the game.  If there is a deck that is powerful, and you get to the game where you have bid really high chains to be able to play the powerful deck, it is really defeating to win by current amber state, or lose for that matter.  The final game that is supposed to be the definitive answer to who is the better player, is rushed to an end.

In bigger tournaments, where it is expected I will play all day, I think this is a great format, but the time needs to be addressed so the third game isn't rushed.  Maybe play each game in a set of 35 minutes so that the final round always has 35 minutes available to play.

At PAX every round was a set 35 min.  And I agree, I don't think this should be the format you use for a weekly event.  It should be reserved for full tournaments.  

For the chain introduced in the 3rd round.. That you know the game will likely go to time is one of the things you have to factor in to your bid.  But I will say that playing all 3 days at PAX in several tournys of various styles, I only went to time 1 time.  That includes sealed deck games, which again were still on a 35 min time limit.  I had one other come very close, and my opponent and I agreed we'd play to the conclusion no matter what as it was the final round and we were both going for a sweep.  But we finished under time anyway.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's a good point about the third game being problematic. I like the idea of single game rounds and chains are applied in the following rounds according  to your record. So if I'm 2-1 against a 1-2 opponent 7 chains(too much?) are applied. If I'm 3-0 14 are applied and so on. That seems like a satisfying challenge if I have a strong deck and fair if I've got the weak one.  

On the issue of swapping, I think it's fine in sealed but if I'm bringing a deck to a tournament I want to live and die by it. I know it's an inanimate object but darn it the little guy is one of a kind and after spending some time with it I care about it's feelings even if it doesn't have any.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The third game problematic? Adaptive flawed?

all I’m really hearing so far is that the time limit is considered too harsh by some, that doesn’t make the format itself flawed or problematic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...