Moving discussion that started here to its own thread.
Some interest has been expressed in having a mono color only tournament, to get more of a spotlight and showcase on how the monocolor decks fare against one another and how to play them in perhaps unexplored ways.
Please post in this thread if you’d be interested in participating, and also your thoughts on:
Would you be in favor of limiting signups per color to encourage equal representation of all 6 decks (or perhaps random assignment of colors per matchup that evenly distributes matchups)
What (if any) handicap should be given to the special case of Black vs Blue (or any other known really bad mono color matchups, though this is the only one I’m aware of)
I’d rather not restrict who can use each color, since it would be pretty lame if someone who really liked one particular color was told they found out about the tourney too late to get their favorite, or that they only have a small random chance to get their favorite. I’d expect people in that position to not participate at all, and that seems like a bad idea for the first tournament of this kind.
I’m not sure about Black vs Blue, except that Blue probably has to be able to go first every time. With how oppressive Black is in this matchup, Blue needs to have the initiative if they want to have a chance…
Is Black vs Blue really that bad? We’re not actually saying that Black wins every time, right? It’s like what… 8-2? If Black goes first? Does it really need special measures?
(I did follow the EricF-FrozenStorm thread, but I’m pretty sure that was limited to Black going first with it’s best possible draw. I don’t think you played a more ‘normal’ game, right?)
8-2 is pretty awful, and I’m not even sure it’s that close. Eric and I did not play more “normal” games, but I’ve played lots of normal games of it and it’s not very fun to play as the Blue player. It’s hard to play it repeatedly as an experiment, as the blue player is really not having fun
I’ve played 15+ games of the matchup with @YoungBuck, with Blue P1 or P2, and we got blue maybe one or 2 wins? And they were in pretty extreme cases, by the very slimmest of margins.
I continue to have an open invitation to play Black against anyone who wants to play Blue though, so people can experience the pain for themselves XD And I’m okay with no one playing Blue, if that’s what people choose to do. But if someone does want to play Blue, especially a beginner, I’d advocate for them to get an advantage in the Blue vs Black matchup. It’s really pretty miserable, IMO
I’d argue for as few alterations to the game as possible for the first monocolor tourney at least, so that everyone is on the same page when discussing balance issues for later ones. Any buffs to Blue and/or nerfs to Black would also need to be carefully considered, so that they don’t have a drastic effect on other matchups. Codex hasn’t been out for a whole year yet, so I’m hesitant to have any tournaments that aren’t using the same cards/rules that people playing IRL have.
Edit: It sounds like you’re suggesting a special exception that only applies to Blue vs Black. That might be better, but explaining to new people why that is needed seems like an issue, and I’m sure it’ll be hard to reach a consensus on what specific change(s) should be made in that matchup.
How about a 6-round tournament in which you get to play each monocolour once? Maybe have a Finessse wildcard you can play once in the tournament to switch in for once of the monocolour specs.
If you do that, then maybe allow Finesse to be subbed in once and Bashing once? You’re never obligated to use either, so if each can only be used once there’s likely to be more experimentation with Bashing builds than would otherwise happen (since some people will want to use Neutral more than once) while not forcing it on anyone who doesn’t want to use it.
One option without actually changing the game at all is if you get into a black vs blue matchup the blue player is allowed to change their spec for that match to another color.
I’d be interested in this type of tournament! I think it’s a little easier to predict what an opponent can do when they are on monocolor as opposed to multi, though it could just be my relative lack of codex knowledge.
Another approach to addressing imbalances between different colors which doesn’t require any special casing would be to play games in pairs, switching specs. For example, something like:
Each participant chooses a color when entering the tournament.
Each participant plays a pair of games vs. each other participant.
In the first game of each pair, players play as the color they chose.
In the second game of each pair, players play as the color their opponent chose.
Players accumulate a number of points for each win (a flat 1, their remaining base HP, or some other valuation method)
When all games have been completed, whoever has the highest point total wins the tournament.
Personally, I like the idea of a monocolored tournament, but don’t like the idea of special case rules. If Finesse is allowed to be swapped in for a spec, I’d want Bashing to be allowed also. If a swap is allowed in one game, I’d want a swap to be allowed for each game. I don’t like the idea of guaranteeing one color the first turn vs. another, even if there’s a justified perception that there’s an imbalance, but I wouldn’t mind allowing lower ranked players to choose whether to play first or second. In other words, I’m not too picky about what the rules are, as long as they’re consistent.
This sounds like a fun idea. Another option is to let players choose two colors and let them change on the basis of the match-up. There are several ways to do that, one is that you play twice against each opponent and in each game one player has a ‘home’ advantage - which means the opponent chooses one of their colors first, and the home team chooses second. That way, you can pick blue as one of your colors and avoid the bad match-up.
I didn’t want to step on the toes of anything @EricF had cooking, and it sounds like signups will begin soon for CAUS (with a planned start date of the summer solstice, June 20).
But I thought of an idea that:
A) Accomplishes what I really wanted out of a mono-tourney, which is to get some starting data on what the expected win % is in each mono-matchup, and
B) Allows for games to run at whatever pace players are comfortable
What I have in mind is a format something like this:
We hold signups for players to play in one or more 10-game series of one specific mono vs mono matchup (I’d keep a spreadsheet of who’s playing what against what)
Once a matchup has players on both sides (e.g. Someone has signed up for Green vs Red, and someone else has Red vs Green), those two players start a “warm-up/experimentation” series, similar to how @Nekoatl and me are doing with Black vs Blue (see here)
Once both players feel “expert enough” to have a good handle on that matchup, they start a 10-game series
A “Master Thread” (I’ll administer) will link to each game in that 10-game series, so spectators can easily see how each game plays out (I’ll summarize any finished game in the link, something like “Black Defeats Blue on P2T6 via Metamorphosis”)
“Tournament Series” runs as long as it takes to finish all the 10-game series
We’d only need 15-20 players if some are willing to do 2-3 matchups, as there are only 15 matchups when you leave out mirror matches.
I’ll get started on the spreadsheet for signups, but please indicate your interest by replying to the poll below!
#Would you be interested in playing one (or more) 10-game mono vs mono series?
Yes, I want to join the data-gathering mono experiment!
This seems like a great idea! I voted yes, but I won’t be able to do it for a couple weeks at least (lots of IRL stuff keeping me busy, plus IYL5 as an existing commitment). Hopefully I can help with this later, though!
