News Shop
Events Chat

XCAPS21 Ideas?

Hey y’all!

CAWS20 is coming to a close and it’ll be time to get signups going for XCAPS21. We’ve traditionally done “fun formats” for Spring and Fall, but we don’t have to.

What are people feeling? What’s the interest level of folks in XCAPS? Hit up the poll below!

Would you sign up for a Spring Swiss Tourney?
  • Yes, and I want another rebalance format!
  • Yes, and I want some other fun format! (comment below w/ what format)
  • Yes, but let’s keep it standard play
  • No, I want a break from tourneys

0 voters

1 Like

Do we have a good idea of the rebalances we’d like to see? e.g. Bomber’s idea for Bird’s Nest (Birds disappear with the Nest)?
(Still happy to run one of these.)

1 Like

I say keep it really low key, minor changes. Just subtle things that nudge the balance, not huge sweeping changes which muddy results and make it difficult to see what effect it is really having.

If I were to have my way, the change list would be less than ten cards.

I’d have to look at all the feedback to summarize well, but broadly what I recall is:

  • Toning down the Black nerfs
  • Toning down the Red buffs
  • Bird’s Nest change you mentioned
  • Matching DS to ancient nerf
  • Other small reigning in of buffs / nerfs that felt out of line in the last tourney
1 Like

esp the mines. They were too OP.

1 Like

So, limit to the most important (not necessarily biggest) changes, rather than dozens of little tweaks?

Another option is to make no (or minimal) changes to the cards, and change the Tech building rule to:

  1. All levels cost only 1g/2g/3g to build.
  2. No free rebuilds.

That’s an interesting wrinkle on the tech buildings… so no multicolor penalty? Do we feel that would advantage P1 more (as gold is often a factor in the T2 threshold and as the priority attacker P1 probably gets more building kills than P2)?

Rhe multicolor penalty still applies: this would mainly be an attempt to get Tech III to be more attainable.

1 Like

Would it be worth trying to make Surplus usable, in the same vein?

Sure, update all those costs too:
Tech Lab - 0
Hero’s Hall - 1
Tower - 2
Surplus - 3

Someone want to playtest that idea? I’m a little wary it’ll sway P1 heavy. I can do a 3-game series w/ a willing participant just to kick the tires.

What about a monocolor tournament where you get to pick one (or a couple), Fantasy Strike “Boss Rush” style modifiers for your deck (where the modifiers are slight nerfs on Red and Black, and slight buffs to other things)? You could even pick them per-round

1 Like

Oh, reduce cost for the other add-ons too? I thought the rest felt about right.

If you’re making Tech II only cost 2g, Hero’s Hall should cost less than that, and at that point might as well go all the way.

2 Likes

Boss Rush effects like what? “You ignore multicolor penalty” - “you can make one worker without using a card” - “your 3-cost Tech 0 cards have +1 HP”?

More like the balance changes we played with last tourney, just opting into them.

Like I’m playing Black and I pick two of:

  • Vandy maxbands at 6
  • Dark Pact costs 1 HP from Vandy
  • Lich’s Bargain deals 6 damage to base
  • Pestering Haunt costs 1
  • Deteriorate costs 1

And my opponent (Blue) picks two of:

  • Bluecoat musketeer just always has long-range
  • Arresting Constable has haste and costs 3g
  • Porkhand removes gold cost
  • Lawful Search becomes an upgrade which you sacrifice for the same effect

Each color has a consistent list but start of game we pick the two “mods” for the match

But the more generalized list could work too

I wouldn’t want to have things change every round - just at the start of the tourney.

So, maybe a point buy system, where you have 10 points to buy your specs / starter, but can also spend points to buy buffs (eg Rich Earth also makes Wisps) or earn extra points for taking nerfs (eg Deteriorate costs 1)

And then price Black Starter, Demon, Necro, Growth, Anarchy, Finesse etc. at “more that 5 points each” so you have to either take nerfs or go with lesser specs (eg Black (6), Demonology (5), Bashing (0), Fire (0), One Nerf (-1) = 10)

1 Like

I like plain random but model’s choice random sounds interesting too.

1 Like

Custom changes per person don’t seem like it’d be much less of a burden than changes per person per round, when you’re playing a different person each round. Personally, if we’re going to do another balance change tournament, I’d prefer to keep it simple with a consistent list of cost adjustments to the most unbalanced cards and abilities. Partly because it’s easier to remember, and partly because simple changes are less likely to wildly skew the results.

I would like to playtest the buliding cost adjustments variant; I imagine that could be a lot of fun.

Other suggestions (feel free to mix and match):

  • No spec choice or Tech Lab (or maybe pay $2 to de-spec).
  • Pick 4 heroes instead of 3 (hero limit unchanged).
  • May tech additional cards, but must pay $1 for each beyond 2.
  • When paying a card to buy a worker, the paid card goes into your discard pile.

When do you pay for the tech card? Do you need to float and risk stealing, do you pay at end of turn, or do you let it get paid during the upkeep after you have teched?

1 Like

I think it’s best if the cost for extra teched cards is deducted from your worker income. It’s simple, and doesn’t particularly advantage or disadvantage any individual specs. Also, that allows you to make the choice after seeing your hand for the turn. Though I suppose that does mean you could get value from having more than 20 workers, it’s hard to imagine that actually being an issue.