| Register Now | |
| My Points | |
| My Games | |
Take command of a Rebel strike force in the Star Wars universe!
As it stands, only Navy decks are tournament viable for the Dark Side. The tiebreak by objective destruction utterly hoses our slow and steady Sith decks; we worry far more about keeping the Balance in our favor and attack objectives only when doing so will win us the game, or we've managed to get the board so heavily in our favor that we can do so without fear of reprisal.
Before the official rules were released, my local store was using their own system which, while not perfect, did not commit the unforgivable sin of granting clear favor to one faction. It was score-drven - when playing Dark Side, your score was your dial position, when Light, you got 4 points per DS objective destroyed. In either case, a win was worth a maximum of 12 even if you somehow managed to go over. I never saw anyone tie for final score after three rounds, so I don't know how they would have handled that.
I hearby petition that these rules (with an appropriate final score tiebreak) be adopted as the official tournament rules, so as not to unfairly favor objective destruction over Balance and therefore Navy over Sith. All who agree with me, please post your support, and perhaps together we can right this wrong!
Without Signature
| Page 1 of 3 (45 messages) | 1 2 3 ...Last page » |
Just win your game and win with your lightside problem solved.
The sith are good give it a break.
Without Signature
The Gas said:
As it stands, only Navy decks are tournament viable for the Dark Side. The tiebreak by objective destruction utterly hoses our slow and steady Sith decks; we worry far more about keeping the Balance in our favor and attack objectives only when doing so will win us the game, or we've managed to get the board so heavily in our favor that we can do so without fear of reprisal.
Before the official rules were released, my local store was using their own system which, while not perfect, did not commit the unforgivable sin of granting clear favor to one faction. It was score-drven - when playing Dark Side, your score was your dial position, when Light, you got 4 points per DS objective destroyed. In either case, a win was worth a maximum of 12 even if you somehow managed to go over. I never saw anyone tie for final score after three rounds, so I don't know how they would have handled that.
I hearby petition that these rules (with an appropriate final score tiebreak) be adopted as the official tournament rules, so as not to unfairly favor objective destruction over Balance and therefore Navy over Sith. All who agree with me, please post your support, and perhaps together we can right this wrong!
Dude. Stop getting so butthurt. If you're that worried about a tie-breaker point struggle… don't lose as the DS. That particular scoring only comes into play if both players win only with their LS decks. If you're winning with your Sith deck, you shouldn't have to worry too much about it. Plus, if a tournament is coming down that close that they have to compare players' destroyed objective scores to determine the ultimate winner, and you're coming up short, maybe you should change your strategy. I play a sith deck that owns on objective destruction through taking out the opposition and casually waltzing in and blowing their s*** up.
"A little nonesense now & then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka.
I don't agree at all. The rules are fine as is. I play Sith pretty much exclusively and have no problem destroying objectives.
For card search, deckbuilder, articles,podcasts visit: Card Game DB
stormwolf27 said:
The Gas said:
As it stands, only Navy decks are tournament viable for the Dark Side. The tiebreak by objective destruction utterly hoses our slow and steady Sith decks; we worry far more about keeping the Balance in our favor and attack objectives only when doing so will win us the game, or we've managed to get the board so heavily in our favor that we can do so without fear of reprisal.
Before the official rules were released, my local store was using their own system which, while not perfect, did not commit the unforgivable sin of granting clear favor to one faction. It was score-drven - when playing Dark Side, your score was your dial position, when Light, you got 4 points per DS objective destroyed. In either case, a win was worth a maximum of 12 even if you somehow managed to go over. I never saw anyone tie for final score after three rounds, so I don't know how they would have handled that.
I hearby petition that these rules (with an appropriate final score tiebreak) be adopted as the official tournament rules, so as not to unfairly favor objective destruction over Balance and therefore Navy over Sith. All who agree with me, please post your support, and perhaps together we can right this wrong!
Dude. Stop getting so butthurt. If you're that worried about a tie-breaker point struggle… don't lose as the DS. That particular scoring only comes into play if both players win only with their LS decks.
Nope. If both players win as DS, the tiebreaker is objectives destroyed.
"Truth has power. And if we all gravitate toward similar ideas, maybe we do so because those ideas are true…written deep within us. And when we hear the truth, even if we don't understand it, we feel that truth resonate within us…vibrating with our unconscious wisdom. Perhaps the truth is not learned by us, but rather, the truth is re-called…re-membered…re-cognized…as that which is already inside us." Peter Solomon, The Lost Symbol
The tournament rules do favor aggro DS builds. As it stands, I wouldn't even consider running pure Sith at a tournament. The environment that FFG has created favors aggro.
divinityofnumber said:
The tournament rules do favor aggro DS builds. As it stands, I wouldn't even consider running pure Sith at a tournament. The environment that FFG has created favors aggro.
I would tend to disagree. Right now, the most powerful builds are Jedi and Sith Control, and the tournament rules hardly change their effectiveness. I fully expect Luke, Han, Vader, and Palpatine to show up at top tables in tournament play.
"Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny." - Yoda, The Empire Strikes Back.
While I completely favor the idea that FFG would encourage a style of tournament play that is aggressive versus sitting back and winning, I don't see it that way. I think FFG has created a very good balance to tournament play.
I suggest a ton of playtesting with the current and upcoming expansions and be patient and let more cards adjust the game play and not go and try to change the rules so hastely.
divinityofnumber said:
The tournament rules do favor aggro DS builds. As it stands, I wouldn't even consider running pure Sith at a tournament. The environment that FFG has created favors aggro.
divinityofnumber said:
The tournament rules do favor aggro DS builds. As it stands, I wouldn't even consider running pure Sith at a tournament. The environment that FFG has created favors aggro.
The tournament rules may, slightly, but the cards and the game rules do not for the DS. Sith primary decks are just the stronger of the two main DS affiliations at this point.
divinityofnumber said:
The tournament rules do favor aggro DS builds. As it stands, I wouldn't even consider running pure Sith at a tournament. The environment that FFG has created favors aggro.
Without Signature
AngryMojo said:
divinityofnumber said:
The tournament rules do favor aggro DS builds. As it stands, I wouldn't even consider running pure Sith at a tournament. The environment that FFG has created favors aggro.
I for one find this a good thing.
Why do you think so?
"Truth has power. And if we all gravitate toward similar ideas, maybe we do so because those ideas are true…written deep within us. And when we hear the truth, even if we don't understand it, we feel that truth resonate within us…vibrating with our unconscious wisdom. Perhaps the truth is not learned by us, but rather, the truth is re-called…re-membered…re-cognized…as that which is already inside us." Peter Solomon, The Lost Symbol
I personally feel that this tournament rules set is a pretty bad idea. If only for the simple reason that it interferes with what sort of decks you can realistically build and bring to a tournament. As has been said before, there are only three outcomes when playing in a tournament;
One player wins both games.
Both players win as DS
Both players win as LS
Breaking ties with number of objectives destroyed as DS is -wong-. It clearly favours aggressive playstyles and builds for the DS side. How to do it then?
One idea (rough outline, not fully thought through yet) is to time the amount of actual DS -turns- it takes to win. This takes force control into account more effectively, I.e. a ds deck that holds the force throughout a game wins in 1+2+2+2+2+2+2 = 7 turns. Destroying a single objective shortens that to 6 turns. A deck that isnt concerned with the force, but attacks a lot, destroying say three objectives (6 dsdial points) would win in 1+1+1+1+1+1 six turns.
The mechanics unfortunately make it hard to break ties between ds double wins. Perhaps they too should be broken by the performance of the LS deck, objectives destroyed? Any other ideas?
I don't understand why the DS tiebreaker based on destroyed objectives, and not damage inflicted on objectives. There have been games I've lost as the LS in which only one more point of objective damage would have made all the difference. And if the rules were changed this way, they would not punish LS players for going after Heart of the Empire, which the current rules do; nor would they favor DS decks that use Defense Upgrade, because the extra damage would still count towards the tiebreaker.
I also feel the tiebreaker should be restricted to damage inflicted against DS objectives, because this would give the DS the option of defending their own objectives in a control-type playstyle, an option that does not exist as per these tournament rules.
"Truth has power. And if we all gravitate toward similar ideas, maybe we do so because those ideas are true…written deep within us. And when we hear the truth, even if we don't understand it, we feel that truth resonate within us…vibrating with our unconscious wisdom. Perhaps the truth is not learned by us, but rather, the truth is re-called…re-membered…re-cognized…as that which is already inside us." Peter Solomon, The Lost Symbol
MarthWMaster said:
I don't understand why the DS tiebreaker based on destroyed objectives, and not damage inflicted on objectives. There have been games I've lost as the LS in which only one more point of objective damage would have made all the difference. If the rules were changed this way, they would not punish LS players for going after Heart of the Empire, which the current rules do; nor would they favor DS decks that use Defense Upgrade, because the extra damage would still count towards the tiebreaker.
I also feel the tiebreaker should be restricted to damage inflicted against DS objectives, because this gives the DS the option of defending their own objectives in a control-type playstyle.
Hm. Breaking ties with -damage done- to ds objectives could be a good idea I think. However, this still creates some problems just like you say. Even though you still damage the heart of the empire (or a trench run, that would probably have to count too) even if you destroy it and win, you get only 10 damage points as opposed to a "normal win" where you get 14 to 16 points. Also, counting damage done including "defense upgrade" would lessen the value of that card somewhat. Here is my suggestion after some thinking;
"Whenever a tie occurs (I.e both players won either as LS or DS), it is broken by counting the total number of damage points inflicted by the players' light side deck upon dark side objectives. If the light side won either by destroying the heart of the empire or the trench run, this counts as having inflicted 15 points of damage regardless of actual damage dealt to objectives.
When calculating how much damage you inflicted, choose three objectives either in play or in your victory pile. Trench run may be included among these. Add together all damage inflicted up to the objectives base damage capacity.
The player that inflicted the most damage after this calculation wins the tie."
Thoughts?
MarthWMaster said:
I don't understand why the DS tiebreaker based on destroyed objectives, and not damage inflicted on objectives. There have been games I've lost as the LS in which only one more point of objective damage would have made all the difference. And if the rules were changed this way, they would not punish LS players for going after Heart of the Empire, which the current rules do; nor would they favor DS decks that use Defense Upgrade, because the extra damage would still count towards the tiebreaker.
I also feel the tiebreaker should be restricted to damage inflicted against DS objectives, because this would give the DS the option of defending their own objectives in a control-type playstyle, an option that does not exist as per these tournament rules.
Because until the objective is destroyed all the damage in the world doesn't matter. Damaging objectives is not a goal destroying them is, and until that goal is reached you haven't scored anything yet.
| Page 1 of 3 (45 messages) | 1 2 3 ...Last page » |
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS