Why play anything else?

Grandmaster Poster Joined: Jul 18, 2005 Posts: 939

This is going to be a semi-rant. Not against any individuals or RSI as a whole but just a ranting in general. I see my beloved Duelmasters/Duel2 going the way of the dino's rapidly and here is probably the biggest example of why.

I really want to be able to discuss this here in a rational manner. I know people have put tons of time and effort and money into their warriors, but if things don't change I see this as becoming a one dimensional and boring game.

This past tournament:

Primus: AB Won, 7 total styles represented. Only 2 Styles TV'd. 6 of the last 7 warriors were AB's. 8 of the last 10 were AB's. No other styles even came close to TVing with the highest being a 4-3 record.

Contenders: AB Won, 8 total styles represented. Only 3 styles TV'd. TP: 8-3, LU: 10-3 and AB. 4 of the last 5 warriors were AB"s. 5 of the last 7 were AB's.

Eligibles: AB Won, 9 total styles represented. Only 4 styles TV'd. WS 10-3, SL 10-3, LU 11-3 and AB's.

ADM: AB Won, 8 total styles represented. Only 2 styles TV'd. LU, AB. 7 of the last 8 styles were AB.

Freshman: ST Won, 10 total styles represented. Only 3 styles TV'd. TP 11-3, AB 13-3, ST 14-2. No one else came close with the highest of the rest being 5-3. 3 of the final 4 were AB's.

Champs: ST Won, 8 total styles represented. 4 styles TV'd. LU 8-3, PR 9-3, TP 11-3. 3 of thh final 4 styles were ST's.

Adepts: ST Won, 10 total styles represented. 1 style TV'd. 21 of 24 styles were ST's. The last 17 warriors in the tourney were ST's. No other style TV'd.

Inits: ST Won, 10 total styles represented. 5 styles TV'd. BA 8-3, SL 8-3, AB 8-3, LU 13-3, ST's. 8 of the last 9 warriors were ST's.

Apprents: ST Won, 10 styles represented. 4 styles TV'd. PR 8-3, BA 8-3, TP 9-3, LU 12-3. 5 of the last 6 styles were ST's.

Rookies: ST Won, 10 styles represented. 6 styles TV'd. BA, WS, TP, SL, AB, LU. 9 of the last 11 styles were AB's and ST's.

I have been watching this year after year and aside from the anomoly or freakish "off" style. ST's and AB's are going to continue in this fashion unless something is done in the game to prevent this from occuring. What is the point of running styles other than AB from ADM up and AB/ST with the occasional freak from Freshman down?

I just don't want to see this game become one where you try to run a freakish off style just to try to TC with it but for the most part if you want to get the most TC's just run AB's and ST's. Your odds on favorites with those styles for sure.

Only 7 of the 10 styles TV'd. And really the SL's and BA's just barely did so and an occasional WS thrown in.

I am not sure what the answer is and I know its been debated to death in the past. But I think the results above are what the future holds. More and more of the same ole, same ole. Any comments by the managers that have been here for quite a long time would be appreciated too. Like I said this isn't a rant, its more of a conversation starter than anything.

Is there an answer?

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:10 pm

From Rookies through Challengers, Parry-Rips are very viable, just ask Mannequin. They also have a major edge over Strikers.

Bashers have always sucked and always will until the style is changed. They can pick up fluke wins here and there and even have some success in the lower tournies.

Strikers have a limited lifespan, and Freshmen appears to be as high as they can go. There were some that were running in ADM this time out, but I'm guessing their managers ran them since they dropped down a class and they looked interesting. Parry-Strikes seem to fit in this category too, though some of them seem to do well up through ADM.

Total Parries can still be competitive through Eligibles and some rare ones do well in Contenders. An offensive TP even won Challengers in the last mail-in.

Walls of Steel, Parry-Lungers, and Slashers are competitive all the way through. I don't see a Wall of Steel winning Primus or Contenders any time soon, but they give fits to a lot of people along the way. Doc Steele still runs Parry-Lungers and Slashers in Primus and they have been known to beat the unbeatable ABs up there. I think Legacy(a Slasher) even won Primus a year or two ago.

Yes, Aimed Blows are the most dominant style in the game, but Lungers were in the same boat for many years. I (and other players) used to always wonder why anyone would bother rolling a warrior up as something other than a Lunger. They have the highest skill base, so they're the best, right?

Things have changed over the years and I expect that Lee will continue to make changes. Not knee-jerk changes, but little ones here and there. Although Bashers could really use a major overhaul...

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 5:30 pm

The answer is simple: Too many people complain when changes are made. If you could get 100% of the managers to be for change, no matter what it is, just some change, any change, change would happen. But you get people who complain when changes are made, and they take their warriors and go home.

You toss in the "if they consolidate arenas I'll quit" people keeping the 3 team arenas standard, and DA costs vs. team sheets being so far out of proportion; you are just getting tourney warriors being made. Which styles are those?

Try these out and you'll see a different game:
1. No open hand bonus
2. Make team sheets cost 10.75 each, and fill them with the DA style replacements. /me ducks shit thats thrown at him
3. Lower slips after parrys, and allow crit attacks to be crit parried(so its possible to break your weapon when throwing 99.9% crits).
4. Let bashing attacks stun like they are supposed to.
5. reinstitute the 3 fights after the cut, before the tourney(make tourney babies fight in the arena if they want to go in full FE). /me ducks more shit
6. Let the off styles roll up better--a lunger will roll up awesome 1 out of 5 times, how often does a PS roll up decently? 1 outa 20 times?

But people will complain about all of these ideas, so no change will be made. Folks will oppose change until there are so few players left that they can finally agree that something needs to change. It'll be too late by then tho, you'll have AZ F2F's with 25-30 people instead of decent numbers of people(oh, my bad, that happened already?)

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Sep 05, 2005 Posts: 1316

Playing devil's advocate here. The open hand 'bug' was not discovered on purpose but by accident (at least I heard an aimer had his weapon broken then was unhittable). I remember a fight in the World vs. the FONZ where a TP had went open hand (there was a reason) and was unhittable against an aimer for a time (I don't want to disclose why). While there might be a sentiment (I believe the statement was, "a waste of a prize") about this there might be more out there to the open handed bug than just aimers. Being a bottom tier manager I might be incorrect, but hearing the one fight made me wonder what could happen with another warrior that had a decent attack, some defense, and an open hand.

I think more of the problem is the prizes within the tournaments. While they are great for those who have them, it leads to people not trying the new or odd things to see if there is something else out there. Why waste money? You want to win a tourney prize? Run an AB or ST. The only people that might find anything new are the arena players now. Wait, it's all about the tourney.

My thought is to fix the problem with giving all these prizes out. I know there has to be a reason for people to pursue tourney success, unless someone puts pride aside and accolades to find the next big thing in the game. Either that, or Pip's idea of making a freeze date and then run for the time before the tourney to have arena play while maximizing the tourney warriors skill level.

Just the ramblings of a person who's not concerned about just being a tourney manager.

Grandmaster Poster Joined: Jul 18, 2005 Posts: 939

TMM wrote:

Things have changed over the years and I expect that Lee will continue to make changes. Not knee-jerk changes, but little ones here and there. Although Bashers could really use a major overhaul...

Have things really changed? Or have people just found out things that were already there? Wether by accident or on purpose? I know changes were made to tournament classes as far as skills/FE etc, but I mean changes to the skills/styles themselves?

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:15 pm

All I kept thinking after the mail in was 'man, if I had some pikers with a good response strategy, alot of these speed freak strikers would be toast'. After the FTF, I wondered if I could really pull it off down the road. Time will tell, but at least I'm trying and will continue to try.

Make more Rippers, Wastes, and Pikers (good ones, not crap). In one year, I bet the Strikers are'nt as dominant.

Grandmaster Poster Joined: Jul 18, 2005 Posts: 939

mrmojo wrote:

All I kept thinking after the mail in was 'man, if I had some pikers with a good response strategy, alot of these speed freak strikers would be toast'. After the FTF, I wondered if I could really pull it off down the road. Time will tell, but at least I'm trying and will continue to try.

Make more Rippers, Wastes, and Pikers (good ones, not crap). In one year, I bet the Strikers are'nt as dominant.

I bet they are Wink

The ST's that are TCing don't just have decise going for them.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 7:26 pm

TripwireDuel wrote:

mrmojo wrote:

All I kept thinking after the mail in was 'man, if I had some pikers with a good response strategy, alot of these speed freak strikers would be toast'. After the FTF, I wondered if I could really pull it off down the road. Time will tell, but at least I'm trying and will continue to try.

Make more Rippers, Wastes, and Pikers (good ones, not crap). In one year, I bet the Strikers are'nt as dominant.

I bet they are Wink

The ST's that are TCing don't just have decise going for them.

Sounds like an exciting challenge

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Apr 15, 2004 Posts: 2958

Quote:

Eligibles: AB Won, 9 total styles represented. Only 4 styles TV'd. WS 10-3, SL 10-3, LU 11-3 and AB's.

For what its worth, there was a second SL TV at 8-3.

I don't argue your point though. However, I would suggest there is a strong relationship between the sheer volume of STs that get run and their level of success in Basic, it isn't just due to their strength vs. other styles. Clearly those two things are related (people run them because they are good, and because more of them are run AND they are good, they are more likely to end up on top), but it also has to do with the fact that there are more ST rollups than rollups for other styles. You look at the numbers for Rookies in the 1st round: 133 ST, 101 AB, 95 LU, 68 TP, 40 WS, 27 SL, 22 PS, 22 BA, 19 PR, 6 PL. Roughly 25% of Rookies were STs, 20% were ABs and 20% were LUs. The top 3 styles made up almost 2/3 of the Rookies tournament. This effect gets even more pronounced in higher Basic tournaments, presumably as people abandon non-performing warriors. STs made up 37% of the Adepts tournament, for instance.

Normally, when I make Rookies for a given tournament, I try to throw in the token PR, PL, PS, WS, BA, and SL. Partly due to laziness, partly due to being slightly jaded, all I sent into Rookies this time was ST, LU, TP and AB. You know what? I had the worst Rookies tournament in two years and it also wasn't as fun. The one off-the-wall Rookie that I ran this year (an AB, off-the-wall stats, not style) went 12-3. The most fun I had was cheering for my Inits BA who finished at 7-3, watching the progress of my future Freshman sandbagger who is a BA (although he's not quite ready for prime time), and cheering for my 8-3 SL in Eligibles.

Part of the reason for the success of Mannequin's PR and his clones and pretenders is the fact that STs are such successful basic warriors. There was also a plethora of tank LUs who did quite well in the lower tournaments, and that is largely due to their success against STs, I would imagine. This metagame still makes tournaments interesting, despite the fact that there is a clear favorite style.

That's my take on it, anyway. I really can't speak much to Contenders and Primus, however.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:34 pm

A few thoughts of my own and then thoughts on random comments others made:

- In my opinion in this tourney, there was a tweak to make attack more effective. I don't think it caused a big enough ripple in the high ADM classes (still can't hit them enough), but the top down effect is one of the reasons why Strikers might have seemed a little over the top in the bottom tourneys.
- Why run useless styles? Because they are fun? I dunno, do those of us still playing after all these years still play for a balanced game? I mean, it can totally help....but.... Change or don't change, I don't know if I care either way, I'm mostly an addict and I believe that no matter what changes they make, the good managers will still rise to the top and people will just be complaining about something else regardless.

Tripwire wrote:

Quote:

Primus: AB Won, 7 total styles represented. Only 2 Styles TV'd. 6 of the last 7 warriors were AB's. 8 of the last 10 were AB's. No other styles even came close to TVing with the highest being a 4-3 recor

Ironically, it's AB and LU--because of the LU. There are styles that can do well against the AB (esp. in Mail-In), but it's actually the Lungers who clear out all of the threats for the bare-handed Aimed Blow. If this upcoming mail-in, every single manager agreed to: 1.)Run every maxxed WS and TP that they have. and 2.)Not run any LU/PL that can't regularly beat a top 5 Aimed Blow, then there's a really really good chance that you could have a shocking Primus winner.

Quote:

Freshman: ST Won, 10 total styles represented. Only 3 styles TV'd. TP 11-3, AB 13-3, ST 14-2. No one else came close with the highest of the rest being 5-3. 3 of the final 4 were AB's.

Small detail, final 4 was 1 ST, 1 TP, 2 AB.

TMM wrote:

Quote:

From Rookies through Challengers, Parry-Rips are very viable, just ask Mannequin. They also have a major edge over Strikers.

Their viable, but like Slashers, not cost effective. You have to be willing to wade through a lot of trash to find the really good ones. Whereas, Strikers are competitive right out of the box due to their learning curve.

TMM wrote:

Quote:

Yes, Aimed Blows are the most dominant style in the game, but Lungers were in the same boat for many years. I (and other players) used to always wonder why anyone would bother rolling a warrior up as something other than a Lunger. They have the highest skill base, so they're the best, right?

Yup. When I first started playing, people were saying the same thing. Fortunately, I ignored their advice and was well-positioned when AB powers were discovered. (You clearly were too) And hopefully the managers of tomorrow can filter through some of the jaded voices of today. If you're playing for the top end, you must have a versatile stable and be sure to not just chase whatever is hot right now.

TMM wrote:

Quote:

Although Bashers could really use a major overhaul...

Yeah, this is pretty much the one style I think is totally worthless

Pip wrote:

Quote:

2. Make team sheets cost 10.75 each, and fill them with the DA style replacements. /me ducks shit thats thrown at him
5. reinstitute the 3 fights after the cut, before the tourney(make tourney babies fight in the arena if they want to go in full FE). /me ducks more shit

Don't know why you're ducking, I think these are two of your better ideas. I would support #5, 1000%, especially if we could bring back the Novices (and kill Champs) while we're at it.

JGW wrote:

Quote:

I think more of the problem is the prizes within the tournaments. While they are great for those who have them, it leads to people not trying the new or odd things to see if there is something else out there. Why waste money? You want to win a tourney prize? Run an AB or ST. The only people that might find anything new are the arena players now. Wait, it's all about the tourney.

My thought is to fix the problem with giving all these prizes out. I know there has to be a reason for people to pursue tourney success, unless someone puts pride aside and accolades to find the next big thing in the game. Either that, or Pip's idea of making a freeze date and then run for the time before the tourney to have arena play while maximizing the tourney warriors skill level.

The tourney managers actually have the most incentive to find the next big thing in the game. You absolutely do need a solid basic foundation before being able to compete in tourneys. If you try to be tourney-competitive before being basic-competitive, you will find it a much harder path. Every great tourney manager today (with one possible exception) was an excellent basic manager in the past. Many still are trying new things in basic, you just won't hear about it until they use it to win a tourney.

(Random stat of mine, 15/62 warriors I sent were ST or AB)

Tripwire wrote:

Quote:

Have things really changed? Or have people just found out things that were already there? Wether by accident or on purpose? I know changes were made to tournament classes as far as skills/FE etc, but I mean changes to the skills/styles themselves?

They've changed. (In my opinion, for the worst) There have been some pretty significant changes to both endurance and defense. (And like I said above, I think they might have been finally messing with attack this tourney)

mrmojo wrote:

Quote:

All I kept thinking after the mail in was 'man, if I had some pikers with a good response strategy, alot of these speed freak strikers would be toast'. After the FTF, I wondered if I could really pull it off down the road. Time will tell, but at least I'm trying and will continue to try.

It works in a Mail-In, at a FtF, unlikely. Doesn't need to even be a Piker. Lots of styles have good response builds that see action in Mail-Ins.

OAB wrote:

Quote:

The one off-the-wall Rookie that I ran this year (an AB, off-the-wall stats, not style) went 12-3.

I totally know which warrior that was without even looking it up. Freak.

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:45 pm

TripwireDuel wrote:

I have been watching this year after year and aside from the anomoly or freakish "off" style. ST's and AB's are going to continue in this fashion unless something is done in the game to prevent this from occuring. What is the point of running styles other than AB from ADM up and AB/ST with the occasional freak from Freshman down?

I just don't want to see this game become one where you try to run a freakish off style just to try to TC with it but for the most part if you want to get the most TC's just run AB's and ST's. Your odds on favorites with those styles for sure.

Only 7 of the 10 styles TV'd. And really the SL's and BA's just barely did so and an occasional WS thrown in.

I am not sure what the answer is and I know its been debated to death in the past. But I think the results above are what the future holds. More and more of the same ole, same ole. Any comments by the managers that have been here for quite a long time would be appreciated too. Like I said this isn't a rant, its more of a conversation starter than anything.

Is there an answer?

I'm not sure there is a single answer to the AB/ST tourney dilemma. They really are opposite ends of the spectrum with most every other style somewhere in-between.

ST's are dominant in basic play for the following reasons: design, learns and endurance burn. Most successful ST's start with a 21 WT and learn three skills per fight. In addition, the best ones max out their skills in the most helpful areas: INIT, ATT & DEC. This gives them a considerable advantage versus most styles even though they start with a lower base than most styles. Throw in low endurance burn, the largest weapon selection and tactics in the game and you have a style that can find a way to beat any other style.

These advantages lose their power as the other styles max their skill learns. Their higher skill bases negate the ST's and their difference in their endurance burn levels off as they work on their physical stats (ST, CN & WL). This is why you seldom see ST's in tourneys past Freshmen. Perhaps a few with bonuses in defense, endurance and a FIST fave will test the waters past Freshmen. Will it work? I don't know, but I would try it if I had such a warrior in my stable.

AB's are different. They are very good Rookies warriors, but their effectiveness drops off in relation to the other styles until they reach the Freshmen class. Why? Design, learns and bases. Sound familiar? An AB can win a Rookie tourney with anything from a 3 to 21 WT. There is no right or wrong way to design an AB (excluding the 21 DF, though you can do well with less). The problem after Rookies is that your low WT AB's aren't going to learn enough skills to compete against their peers in the basic tourneys. Those with higher WT's (17-21) usually learn skills in the areas that don't help as much as they could (lots of RIP, ATT & PAR). They do well if they get the jump and keep swinging. They don't do well versus styles that jump or riposte them.

Once AB's get to AD and learn all their skills they become a force to be reckoned with. Most of the tourney stalwarts have focused all their energies on maxing their ATT & DEF, their physicals, and their faves (FI, rhythms). They would be difficult to deal with even if the open hand "bug" didn't exist. They would still win tourneys; they just wouldn't win them as often.

OK, so I've told you nothing you don't already know. On to some possible solutions:

1) Design warriors to take advantage of the AB/ST's weaknesses.

As TMM said, I've done very well over the years with PR's. I was asking myself many of the same questions you've asked and wondered what I could do to counter the ST trend. I turned to the ST's bane, the PR. I decided to design and run a bunch of PR's to see if I could make a dent in the ST's success. Yes, I know, most PR's suck and they are difficult to run. If you get a very good one, as I did with Daydream Believer, you can make ST's run like hell when they see you coming.

The same thing goes for the AB's. You really want to be throwing BA, LU, SL and ST's at them in the lower tourneys. I don't think there is a whole lot you can do with them in the AD tourneys. At that point it most likely has to be a very good LU, PL or SL.

2) RSI needs to publish the criteria it uses to classify ADM warriors for ALL to see.

Rookies through Champions is based strictly on FE. We all know EXACTLY where we stand before a tourney because we all get minis. Challengers is a different story. There are skill caps (that are overlooked until suck-offs), FE caps (100 FE, though it appears to have been dropped to 90 FE) and political points that have to be worked around. The classes from Freshmen through Primus are a guessing game. RSI needs to publish the criteria AND cut-off points for everyone to see. This would accomplish a couple of things. Everyone would know what the breakpoints are and could develop their warriors accordingly. No more guessing whether or not you are over/under the cut-off line. Warriors planning bust outs could once again come out of nowhere to win tourneys. It would definitely bring some excitement back to the tourneys that has been lacking for quite some time. The second thing this would accomplish would be to bring more of the fringe AD players back into AD tourney play. These players don't have the warriors/resources to "know" where the cut-off lines are at the present time, unlike the usual suspects that consistently dominate the AD tourneys. Knowing the criteria and where the cut-off lines are won't do anything to hurt the game. It will only help it by making it clear to everyone. RSI can always reserve the right to adjust the criteria/cut-off lines as they see fit.

3) RSI needs to end sandbagging.

How? They need one small programming change. They need to make warriors train on a continual basis until they have nothing left to train, skills & stats. No more "Can no longer train SKILL in this arena !" or Can no longer train DEFTNESS in this arena!" comments. If your warrior maxes his skills/stat, the program moves on to the next/and or lowest one until there is nothing left to train. This will force warriors to always be moving upwards towards Primus. This will keep warriors from "parking" from Challengers through Contenders. In time you would see Primus actually become a competitive tourney (it might still be an AB/LU affair, it would just have lots more of them).

Mannequin

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:08 pm

I totally agree and adjustments that need to be made. Things have been too stagnant for too long.

Here is an interesting idea.

Have barehanded warriors take damage when hitting armor and add in that warriors fighting barehanded can break thier hand. It's only fair since everyone else can have their weapon break, why shouldn't they have their weapon break. Once a couple AB's drop in a fights because they break thier hand , they might start using weapons again. You could create new fist weapons for those warriors to use that will help protect their hands.

Slightly lower Strikers starting attack bases.

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Jul 17, 2002 Posts: 1054

I like the continual train idea. It would clear up the the current trend of seeing the same names in the same classes over and over again. I also agree that the criteria for Freshman+ should be published and if combined with the must train something viable it would allow managers to plan how to bring their warrior up the published cut line then bust out in the tourney like they used too.

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 12:25 am

I always thought a very simple change that could dramatically affect the game is to just add a column to the newsletter that lists each warrior's FE. Sure, it doesn't change the fact that you're still in the same bracket, but you have a better idea of who to challenge, who to avoid, and who is successful based on tactics versus time. I actually feel a little sad when one of my tournified warriors is challenged by a newbie and I clean his clock. I wouldn't feel the same if he knew what he was getting into. Why do I feel bad? There are occasionally returning players (much like myself about 2 years ago) who are testing the waters to see if they can re-capture the magic of youth, but after going 0-15 in our arenas, I'm sure some get disillusioned and retire again (I got off to a rocky start and contemplated throwing in the towel, but some managers helped get me up to speed to stick around). Since a rough estimate of their FE becomes apparent during tourneys, it's not like this is completely private information. At least 81 helped bring a little balance back to the game.

Chase

Advanced Expert Poster Joined: Nov 24, 2003 Posts: 181

Mannequin wrote:

TripwireDuel wrote:

Is there an answer?

2) RSI needs to publish the criteria it uses to classify ADM lines

Mannequin

oy

This makes alot of sense. Yeah I know this is a benefit to the manager who does less work(i.e lazy in some eyes) but if your looking for the game to be saved, etc this is a good minor small starting point. All those years off an on I have spent graduating warriors(most of whom are non-AB) and the immortals that I have been fortuante to have received from other managers... well hell I dont know if I should park them, prep em a lil bit than park em, bust em out, tell em you suck ass cause your not an AB now go into the basement and ferment until some lucky schmuck discovers a hidden bug where I can dust your old ass off, etc, etc.
Its ridiculous and needs to be corrected. IMHO it wont make a significant change but it will make enough of a change where the ABs domination is lessened to a degree and make it worhtwhile running the other styles.
Yeah I know networking amongst your friends and enemies and alliances can narrow it down but there is still no definitive line and there needs to be one..... (yes by God dummy it down for us that dont have the patience/time, etc.... yeah it might piss off those of you that have "figured it out" etc, etc and God bless ya, but we are talking about game preservation and you sob's aint getting any younger.)
And furthermore from a biased point of view I also agree with Pip in regards to bringing back the basic split.... with one minor thing added..... ADVANCE NOTICE on when the tourney is gonna run and when the split occurs. This brings back more of a luck factor into it and<GASP> in my opinion opens up the playing field for other Basic stlyes to have a chance....(once again IMHO the Striker is still the main factor up till Champs/Challengers but other styles have more of an effect).
I'm gonna go so far as to use the Basher as an example. Yes I agree that this style needs an overhaul....however I have always been a Basher lover(blame it on my old Midnight Foundation roots.... MF'er roots for those of ya that remember). I had very good success with the Basher style when there was a Basic split and I got those extra FE right before the tourney ran......(hell I had better success all around when there was a Basic split seemingly having a higher TV/TV percentage than the current system).... as a matter of fact to the best of my knowledge a warrior of mine(Gamble) was the last Basher to win a tournament and that was the last year that RSI had the Basic split(2001-2002 I believe). Could Gamble as a Basher have won a Basic tourney in the new system? Doubtfull. Hell no Basher can win a Basic tourney now(although as some know I am determined to give it a shot a Challengers with a quad 17 Basher I have been prepping for years and is still a few 7years away).
Basically open up the luck factor even more. Yes this is a pain in the ass and a detriment to may that actually work at there results(and much props to ya). But for the average Joe it just isnt feasable and we are talking about saving a dying game after all.
Any rate that is my "Welcome Back" rant. I promised my alliance mates Mike, Chad, Ward, and the rest of the boys in The Iron Council that I would be back playing in some way shape or form in the 1st quarter of 2008 and I am keeping my word and have sent in strat sheets a week ago(still debating how active in participation I will be).
Im gonna use a quote I used to them..... "This game is like a diamond that has lost the majority of its shine but is still twinkles enough to have me interested". The question is will the twinkle eventually fade for myself and others if no significant changes are made? This has been debated and discussed for years and for the most part nothing has been done outside of a few minor tweaks. Not to sound all morbid and to sound like Deke or anything but a change is sorely needed to insure the longevity of the game.