Tournament/competition rules

[Chaos]

Why ban cards. If you hate it so much, defend against it. You fear it so much, put 4 in your deck.

A better way of doing a tournament might be to make everyone start an entirely new character. After each game, you would get 10 minutes or so to add your new cards to your deck. This would allow anyone even people who have never played before to join in. On the other hand that might be better rules for a league or something like that.

[Ben-Ra]

Scamp said:

No, you missed my point. Kinda. Imagine a fighting game where the computer takes over for you for five seconds.

Or, imagine a card in a game like Magic the Gathering where you have to let some random guy play your deck for a few turns.

It's kind of like that. And anyway, if you're going to bring up the point that you CAN stop bind and haunt, it defeats your earlier point about having to ban pain and drain magic and so forth.

Bind is ban or restrict-worthy in a 2-player game because IMO it's too good. You're going to see every deck contain 4 of these. If you stop it with something like anti-magic or barrier, then your opponent will just hold on to them until it wears off. Bam, 1-4 free turns. The price is pretty cheap and since you get to draw cards to replace playing the bind...

I just think it's too good.

As for haunt, there are already enough random factors in the game as it is. Under haunt the computer could make you go around the map the wrong way, replace your old willow with a wall of fire, use your only defense item to save a goblin, cast your combo spells for no good reason...
If I lose I'd like it to be because the other deck was well-designed or I make my own critical errors. There's already enough randomness as it is with the die and card-drawing. The later in the game the spell is used, the more potential for a major screw-up that you didn't cause.
I mean, there's a reason why computers aren't fun to play after a while.

Anyway, that's just my opinion.


As for the 1-day thing, I just don't think Culdcept is a game suited for such an event. I don't know how long a 4-player game can go, and setting up and playing multiple games with ratings and scores and such would take a lot of effort. But if you can do it, go ahead. I'd love to hear some 'tourney results'.

Oh yeah, and what about looking at other people's hands? Should there be some sort of system where people have to look away or something like that? It'd be cool if you could hook it up to four tvs or something like that...

There are moves in fighting games that reverse your controls, make you unable to move, make you slower, make you unable to block, etc. For the most part, these moves are not overpowered or banned.

My point about other cards fitting the same general description is that no one's suggesting banning those cards, even though they have a lot in common with Haunt/Bind. As I said, all of them can be stopped somehow.

If I cast Barrier, that gives me four turns to make him discard it...there are cards that do that, right? If I was really worried about Haunt (which I'm not, personally), I might try that. Also, Anti-Magic negates the first thing that tries to hit you, it doesn't have a time limit.

You say it's great in the late game, which can be true. But how about Drain Magic? Say you've got around 3000g because of a big toll, which wouldn't happen until the late game. Someone draws Drain and you lose 1000g! Wow, 1000g is a lot to lose! And it's really good in the late game. Ban it!

Yes, there is a lot of randomness in Culdcept. I had to learn (painfully) that if you can't live with that randomness, don't play it. Lots of cards have random or % chance effects. You can choose not to play with them (which is perfectly understandable), but some people like them, and none of them are gamebreaking.

A 4-player game can take a few hours, depending on the map and magic goal. That is kinda long. But, if people want to get together and don't live too near each other, there's really no other choice. I'm not sure why you think doing rankings and scores (especially for such a low number of games) would be hard. I've been in plenty of fighting game tournaments with many players that don't have problems. I think 8 or 16 people playing a few games of Culdcept would not be hard to manage at all.

Knowing what other players have in their hands is part of Culdcept, period. It would be very difficult to implement some kind of secrecy system. Also, I'm sure many cards would increase or decrease in usefulness if hands were not visible. Maybe they'll make a new version with PSP linkup so people can have secret hands, which would be tight.

[Scamp]

Ben-Ra said:

There are moves in fighting games that reverse your controls, make you unable to move, make you slower, make you unable to block, etc. For the most part, these moves are not overpowered or banned.

My point about other cards fitting the same general description is that no one's suggesting banning those cards, even though they have a lot in common with Haunt/Bind. As I said, all of them can be stopped somehow.

If I cast Barrier, that gives me four turns to make him discard it...there are cards that do that, right? If I was really worried about Haunt (which I'm not, personally), I might try that. Also, Anti-Magic negates the first thing that tries to hit you, it doesn't have a time limit.

You say it's great in the late game, which can be true. But how about Drain Magic? Say you've got around 3000g because of a big toll, which wouldn't happen until the late game. Someone draws Drain and you lose 1000g! Wow, 1000g is a lot to lose! And it's really good in the late game. Ban it!

Please stop with the sarcasm. It's annoying and somewhat insulting. Also you're taking my points out of context when you do that.

The moves in fighting games are examples of annoying effects, but none of them are quite the same as having the computer control you. Several cards in Culdcept prevent you from doing stuff. Only one lets the computer control you.

The fact that something can be prevented somehow doesn't mean that it's not overpowering or banworthy. In all the CCGs I've ever played all the banned or restricted cards can be prevented or worked around in some way. But to do so means you have to tailor your deck in some fashion specifically to prevent this from occuring. Usually this means you'll lose against any other kind of deck.

Ooh! Maybe there can be some kind of sidebar system like in M:TG.

The main thing for me is that nothing is quite like having the game played for you. For two turns you have absolutely no control and that's just plain silly. I can live with the randomness of the game, but the game should be about one player's decisions vs. another player's decisions based on the conditions happening.

Bind I think is too powerful overall. A free turn for cheap? There's a reason why cards like these are banned from most CCGs.


Chaos if I entered a one-on-one tournament that didn't ban Haunt I would put it in my deck. Probably 3 instead of four, anyway. Starting with all new characters is a possibility, but I'd rather do something along the lines of a booster draft in magic. Or, you could have one of each card available and have people 'draft' a card one-by-one until everyone has 50.

But before I get too far ahead of myself I'd just like to see a Culdcept tournament or league first.

[ExMortis]

Haunt and Bind have been around since Culdcept Expansion at least (1999), so they've survived two editions of the game and any tournaments and leagues Japan or Korea or whoever has held since then. I think by this point Omiya has a pretty good idea of what's balanced and what's not.

[Ben-Ra]

Not only has the card been in circulation a long time, but I've looked at quite a few Japanese and Korean decks online, and Haunt is very very rarely used. Same with Bind. That tells me something.

You may disagree with the concept of Haunt, but it's in the game. Someone could use your same argument against discard effects - "I put those cards in my deck for a reason, but they got rid of them! I thought the game was supposed to be about deck construction! If I don't get the cards I put in the deck, I can't play right!"

What's wrong with sarcasm? Are people only allowed to say things in neutral, factual ways? No embellishment or individual expression? Was there a memo I missed? Seriously, if you're bothered by a little sarcasm (it certainly wasn't my maximum effort), you may want to stop using the internet. There's a lot of sarcasm. Also, how was I taking your points out of context? If I did, it was an error. I prefer to discuss/debate/argue fairly, and such tactics are beneath contempt.

[Scamp]

I saw the thread where you posted Japanese/Korean decks online. I don't know if you've looked up a lot of decks other than that, but you mentioned that they play a lot of 4-player games or two-on-two. If that's the case, haunt and bind aren't so bad. (Your partner can rescue you from the haunt.)

I'm against these cards in a one-on-one battle.


The trouble with sarcasm is that sometimes it's difficult to tell whether or not someone is being sarcastic online. Certainly I'm used to sarcasm online, but I'm also used to about 90 percent of the people that talk online being utter morons as well. If you want to debate seriously, then you shouldn't use sarcasm. Someone will miss the point.

[FukmepoleK]

There would need to be a point value gradation for all the cards.

A standard book built on a 5000 point system.

Like a Leoknight would be worth 500 points, a Goblin worth 40 and so on.

The stronger the card, the higher the value.



Ther would also have to be "restricted" cards also. 4 haunts is just disgusting, as is 4 flame lords/ or Old Willows.


For casual play, whatever goes.

ps: Sarcasm Rawks LOL

[Tombolo]

I don't know about banning stuff, but I do know that AIs using Haunt on each other is pretty freaking hilarious.