Deck weighting instead of tiering

Chavez303

So i've seen several threads on the problems with "tiering" already but has anyone given any thought to the idea of deck weighting?

The idea is that cards would be valued and the total value of the cards summed and then decks could be bracketed that way. I understand that the idea of changing cards out between matches would be hard to work around but thats why i'm crowdsourcing this idea.

Example:

Mythic Cards = 10 points

Rare Cards = 5 points

Uncommon Cards = 3 points

Common Cards = 1 point

You could have brackets for various deck values. Clearly a bracket with 20-30 is not going to be laiden with mythics or rares like the 75-100 deck values.

What i'm getting at is that I'm tired of going up against decks that are loaded with mythics and rares (hand to god, just faced a kiora deck made entirely of mythics) while i'm in a lower tier.

Think of this as a way of introducing Pauper tournaments!

orgazmo

I like this idea also. There is a LOT of slumming going on. Can't say I blame anyone since its allowed with he current structure, but no one with all mythic and rare deck should be in anything below gold.

orgazmo

Hours played could be another factor used.

bk1234

The problem is a really good player can do insane things with commons and uncommons. I have a G2 deck that was undefeated in Gold without a single rare or mythic card.

Imperat0r

I support the idea of some new bracketing, but not like this.

The fact that the lowest type of cards can be used in strong decks add diversity and opens up for newcommerd having a shot against oldtimers.

I honestly think that is this games biggest success.

Koolmind

Good idea, you can add how many rounds you had to win , damage , life opponent, other difficult objectives etc

Mainloop25

bken1234 wrote:

The problem is a really good player can do insane things with commons and uncommons. I have a G2 deck that was undefeated in Gold without a single rare or mythic card.

True, so that person should be rewarded for their deck building skill.

I like the thinking behind this idea.

morgue427

like the idea of the last post but can only imagine the coding it would take honestly and the bugs, but one based on skill and cards would be awesome use a g1 with one mythic and 2 golds suppression bonds and oath of giedon mythic is gisealla rrest all commons and uncommons and use them most honestly, lone rider is my favorite tbhmaking him a huge fattie with trample first strike flying vigilence makes for an fun game especially against a koth or kiora

Nitymp

I would love optional objectives that were like:

"Have <2 mythics in deck: +5 points"

babar3355

Chavez303 wrote:

So i've seen several threads on the problems with "tiering" already but has anyone given any thought to the idea of deck weighting?

The idea is that cards would be valued and the total value of the cards summed and then decks could be bracketed that way. I understand that the idea of changing cards out between matches would be hard to work around but thats why i'm crowdsourcing this idea.

Example:

Mythic Cards = 10 points

Rare Cards = 5 points

Uncommon Cards = 3 points

Common Cards = 1 point

You could have brackets for various deck values. Clearly a bracket with 20-30 is not going to be laiden with mythics or rares like the 75-100 deck values.

What i'm getting at is that I'm tired of going up against decks that are loaded with mythics and rares (hand to god, just faced a kiora deck made entirely of mythics) while i'm in a lower tier.

Think of this as a way of introducing Pauper tournaments!

Eh, I don't really think this system fixes the problem. It encourages people to not use their best cards to stay in a lower bracket. We already had people staying in gold tier forever to have less competition. I think D3 needs to A. Create more tiers. B. Split up the brackets (1000 players each)

Chavez303

babar3355 wrote:

Chavez303 wrote:

So i've seen several threads on the problems with "tiering" already but has anyone given any thought to the idea of deck weighting?

The idea is that cards would be valued and the total value of the cards summed and then decks could be bracketed that way. I understand that the idea of changing cards out between matches would be hard to work around but thats why i'm crowdsourcing this idea.

Example:

Mythic Cards = 10 points

Rare Cards = 5 points

Uncommon Cards = 3 points

Common Cards = 1 point

You could have brackets for various deck values. Clearly a bracket with 20-30 is not going to be laiden with mythics or rares like the 75-100 deck values.

What i'm getting at is that I'm tired of going up against decks that are loaded with mythics and rares (hand to god, just faced a kiora deck made entirely of mythics) while i'm in a lower tier.

Think of this as a way of introducing Pauper tournaments!

Eh, I don't really think this system fixes the problem. It encourages people to not use their best cards to stay in a lower bracket. We already had people staying in gold tier forever to have less competition. I think D3 needs to A. Create more tiers. B. Split up the brackets (1000 players each)

On the contrary. I think this does exactly what's needed. Can someone stay in a lower bracket, sure? but they're going to be restricted in the level of cards they're going to be able to use. If someone can make a killer deck using only uncommons and commons, good for them. The nature of draws on the bonus packs makes its likely then that someone else will be able to as well.

Make the rewards commensurate with the point value of the bracket with the upper levels getting better rewards. If its tougher to win, the prizes should be bigger.

The goal is to eliminate people with ridiculous rare and mythic only decks from pummeling decks on a lower tier. It turns "slumming" into choosing what level you want to compete at. Its no different than paper MTG with Pauper, Standard, and Modern. Each has its benefits and challenges.

As for being difficult from a coding standpoint, i dont see a real problem with it. A single additional field is all that would be needed to be added to card tables, this could also segway into getting us the functionality of being able to store decks configurations as well. A new table is really all thats needed.

orgazmo

bken1234 wrote:

The problem is a really good player can do insane things with commons and uncommons. I have a G2 deck that was undefeated in Gold without a single rare or mythic card.

That is not a problem. That is great if they can make a really good commons / uncommon deck. I have one that has 1 mythic (that i don't NEED but makes it easier) and can't beat Avacyn. It hard, and took a lot of thought and effort. OR... use a deck with 8 mythics and 2 rares and walk through with no thought.

Right now you have people with mythic decks competing in silver and gold levels because they don't play any new cards that could push them up a bracket, and they never have to.

The problem with basing it on cards, is you would have to lock in decks for events. I usually have to tweak my deck a bit for new bonus objectives.

chispito

Chavez303 wrote:

babar3355 wrote:

Eh, I don't really think this system fixes the problem. It encourages people to not use their best cards to stay in a lower bracket. We already had people staying in gold tier forever to have less competition. I think D3 needs to A. Create more tiers. B. Split up the brackets (1000 players each)

On the contrary. I think this does exactly what's needed. Can someone stay in a lower bracket, sure? but they're going to be restricted in the level of cards they're going to be able to use. If someone can make a killer deck using only uncommons and commons, good for them. The nature of draws on the bonus packs makes its likely then that someone else will be able to as well.

Make the rewards commensurate with the point value of the bracket with the upper levels getting better rewards. If its tougher to win, the prizes should be bigger.

The goal is to eliminate people with ridiculous rare and mythic only decks from pummeling decks on a lower tier. It turns "slumming" into choosing what level you want to compete at. Its no different than paper MTG with Pauper, Standard, and Modern. Each has its benefits and challenges.

As for being difficult from a coding standpoint, i dont see a real problem with it. A single additional field is all that would be needed to be added to card tables, this could also segway into getting us the functionality of being able to store decks configurations as well. A new table is really all thats needed.

Counter-disagreement. There's such a disparity between mythics (and a few rares) that it only takes one of the right ones to juice up your deck well past a deck with a few random mythics. Like: Ulrich, Olivia, Exert Influence, etc. And the worst thing is it makes the barrier of entry to play below your weight class a lot higher.