Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 76

Thread: Isn't Banning of overpowered cards a strictly worse solution than nerfing them?

  1. #51
    Dan - it isnt the same. A PvE card is not legal in any PvP format. A banned card can still be used in limited, and almost always in legacy. A banned PvP card isn't the same as a PvE card - I had considered the idea actually, but decided it wouldn't be different from just nerfing it, except you banned it for no reason.

    Plus a PvP card is typically going to be weaker in PvE. I think it is unlikely that a banned PvP card woukd need a nerf in PvE.

    I can respect that you haven't seen an argument that convinced you yet. I do have one thing to mention, I doubt it will sway you, but worth a shot: it is easier to unban than it is to un-nerf, and when people are used to nerfs, they wont accept bans. So we should start with bans, and then progress to nerfs if bans aren't working, because it is the easier of the two to fix.
    Xenavire, proud guild leader for The Lions Share.
    http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/n...erlinsmall.png

  2. #52
    Master Theorycrafter
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    790
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenavire View Post
    I am going to put it in simple terms, going off what Oss said: the threat of a nerf would lower the price people would be willing to pay for cards. Period. Any good card could be hit with the nerfbat at any time. All power levels would be questionable. It could happen once in 10 sets, but that threat would still lower the value inherently.
    I'm not sure which I prefer to be honest but I think the "ban is better" people need to realise that the "nerf is better" people are simply saying to replace bans with nerfs. Not to introduce a whole truckload of extra nerfs.

    It's literally replacing "Hmmm X is too good, let's ban it" with "Hmmm X is too good, let's nerf it" - which should only happen very rarely.

    If there would be 2 cards banned in set 1 (after release), then there would be 2 cards nerfed in set 1 instead.

    Once again not throwing my hat in either ring but we should be clear on the argument.

  3. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Werlix View Post
    I'm not sure which I prefer to be honest but I think the "ban is better" people need to realise that the "nerf is better" people are simply saying to replace bans with nerfs. Not to introduce a whole truckload of extra nerfs.

    It's literally replacing "Hmmm X is too good, let's ban it" with "Hmmm X is too good, let's nerf it" - which should only happen very rarely.

    If there would be 2 cards banned in set 1 (after release), then there would be 2 cards nerfed in set 1 instead.

    Once again not throwing my hat in either ring but we should be clear on the argument.
    We do understand, but because nerfs are less extreme, they are more acceptable, and get used more and more often... It snowballs. Even if they start at 2 nerfs in the first year, it could easily become 5 the next year, 9 the year after... And because they can nerf, the devs may (I doubt it, but it could happen) end up complacent and end up making slightly more powerful cards, just because they know they can fix them later.

    Banning is just extreme enough that we would avoid all of that. Well, at least we hope so. But like I said, a ban is easier to reverse than a nerf. I dont know of any errata that was reverted, for example, but I have seen banned cards become legal again.
    Xenavire, proud guild leader for The Lions Share.
    http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/n...erlinsmall.png

  4. #54
    Master Theorycrafter
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Bakersfield CA
    Posts
    551
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenavire View Post
    Dan - it isnt the same. A PvE card is not legal in any PvP format. A banned card can still be used in limited, and almost always in legacy. A banned PvP card isn't the same as a PvE card - I had considered the idea actually, but decided it wouldn't be different from just nerfing it, except you banned it for no reason.

    Plus a PvP card is typically going to be weaker in PvE. I think it is unlikely that a banned PvP card woukd need a nerf in PvE.

    I can respect that you haven't seen an argument that convinced you yet. I do have one thing to mention, I doubt it will sway you, but worth a shot: it is easier to unban than it is to un-nerf, and when people are used to nerfs, they wont accept bans. So we should start with bans, and then progress to nerfs if bans aren't working, because it is the easier of the two to fix.
    Your statement is certainly true, but the point I'm a little unclear on, is that I"m not calling for nerfs, I'm calling for bans and replacements. That's different. The replacement COULD be effectively a nerfed version of the original card, and if you then wanted to un-ban the original card that would obviously be a little awkward (but not unprecedented as MTG has plenty of cards which are strictly better or strictly worse versions of existing cards), but the replacement doesn't have to be just a nerfed version of the original, it could be something completley new, maybe a tweak on the idea that causes it to play a lot different, maybe another bomb card they had planned for the next set they feel could work in this set to, whatever. In that case, if the card does get unbanned latter, we as the players are even more the winner as we got back the original card, plus still get to keep the useful replacement as well.

    Honestly, the more I think about the issue the more I feel like what I really want is just some assurance that if we do get our cards banned, there will be some compensation to the player. The replacement card is just what I feel would be an elegant way to do that, allowing CZE to avoid the confusion of having cards legal in some pvp formats of the current block, but not all, while other cards are legal in all formats, and others still are only legal in pve.

    I do admit though that I was close sighted on the fact that a banned card doesn't HAVE to be made pve only if its not creating an NPE in limited, for example, it could stay there, but I'd still feel horribly slighted every time I pulled one from a pack or picked one in a draft knowing I couldn't actually use it in any legal constructed format. I also want to take a moment to note that I do appreciate your respectful responses and just want to be clear, despite our often contrary opinions on things that seem to constantly have us in arguments on the forums, I have a lot of respect for you and find you one of the wiser and more well spoken members of the hex forum, so I hope you never get the impression that I think poorly of you during our debates.

  5. #55
    I just want to ask something. Why do you want compensation? You aren't losing the card. It hasn't been changed. It could be unbanned later. It is legal in other places. Etc.

    I mean if you think about it, when a set rotates, all of those cards are effectively banned. And the reprinted cards are just them being unbanned. Should players be given compensation when a set rotates?

    It doesn't make a lot of sense to me really, so your input interests me.
    Xenavire, proud guild leader for The Lions Share.
    http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/n...erlinsmall.png

  6. #56
    That is actually a point that was made in the last thread like this that I don't think has been made here...

    The reason banning is more appropriate in a true TCG is because the eventual fate of ALL cards is to be banned. occasionally one is playing havoc with a set in a certain format and has to be banned a little early, but the reprint is the "nerf" if it needs one in the new block. But honestly something that is OP in one block is not necessarily OP in another, so occasionally you can reprint a previously -early banned- card exactly the same and it isn't a problem in that set.
    ----
    http://i.imgur.com/I1MZpF8.png
    HexEnt is too long to type, They're HXE now.
    I am currently trading my unused GK code for a new Tesla Model S P85D
    Feel free to contact me for where you can have it shipped.

  7. #57
    Master Theorycrafter
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Bakersfield CA
    Posts
    551
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenavire View Post
    I just want to ask something. Why do you want compensation? You aren't losing the card. It hasn't been changed. It could be unbanned later. It is legal in other places. Etc.

    I mean if you think about it, when a set rotates, all of those cards are effectively banned. And the reprinted cards are just them being unbanned. Should players be given compensation when a set rotates?

    It doesn't make a lot of sense to me really, so your input interests me.
    Cause having a card rendered unplayable in the format I specifically payed real money to be able to play it in is frustrating. That'd be like if I bought a car to get me to and from work and I was driving for a couple years and then one day they manufacturer comes to me and says there's a recall on their car, you can't drive it on the road anymore, its too dangerous. You can still drive it in our bumper car arena or in any sort of demoltion derby, but no, we're not fixing it for you or refunding your money in anyway, just taking away your right to drive the car in the very place you paid good money to drive it. Oh and you probably still need to get to work, so you're probably going to have to spend money you don't have to buy another car now. When you bought your car you knew it wasn't going to last forever, eventually it was going to break down, but you expected it to last a normal car's life, not be made undrivable for the purpose you bought it 2 years in.

    Thats whats happening with a ban of a card, sure I can still use it in pve, but I paid possibly top dollar to be able to use it to compete in PvP, now I may have to pay top dollar again to build another deck. Sure I knew the block would cycle eventually, but the end of the block was still a long way off. In the end, the manufacturer (in this case CZE instead of the car manufacturer) screwed up, yet I'm the one paying for their mistake.

    That's not to say I'm against bans, not at all, I was actually tickled pink when a ban list was first implemented in yugioh even though I had playsets of nearly everything on the ban list, because I knew the cards going onto the list were hurting the game. I understand that if used well, ban lists help everyone, even those whose cards are banned, because they make the game more enjoyable for all involved and increase player retention. If my choices were bannings with out compensation, or no interaction by CZE at all, I'd always choose bannings. But it would breed infinitely more good will for me if a company like CZE did something classy like put into place some sort of policy that compensated owners of cards they had to ban, whether via replacements or some other method. CZE is run by humans, they're not perfect, they will mess up, just as I'm not perfect at my job either, so at some point a ban will be necessary and when that time comes, I think it would do tremendous good for the morale of the community if they made sure those effected were compensated.

    Corey has said that he doesn't just want to be another DTCG, he wants to be THE DTCG, that he wants to do all the things all the other companies should be doing and always finding new ways to be better so that no other game can ever catch up. I think this would be the sort of policy that would be a step in that direction. I don't know of any game that has such a policy, but I'd love CZE even more if they were the first.
    Last edited by DanTheMeek; 04-07-2014 at 10:33 PM.

  8. #58
    We shouldn't be compensated for bans. If cards that are banned are becoming worthless, we have a fundamental problem that needs to be solved, not patched over with some sort of compensation. Cards losing and gaining value is just part of the nature of the beast. The chance is part of the thrill of being a collector. I'm much more interested in CZE making money, and there being a healthy secondary market than some imagined slight from a constructed tournament banned card. There will still be plenty of people playing casual games of all stripes with various banned or restricted cards.
    ----
    http://i.imgur.com/I1MZpF8.png
    HexEnt is too long to type, They're HXE now.
    I am currently trading my unused GK code for a new Tesla Model S P85D
    Feel free to contact me for where you can have it shipped.

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Gwaer View Post
    We shouldn't be compensated for bans. If cards that are banned are becoming worthless, we have a fundamental problem that needs to be solved, not patched over with some sort of compensation. Cards losing and gaining value is just part of the nature of the beast. The chance is part of the thrill of being a collector. I'm much more interested in CZE making money, and there being a healthy secondary market than some imagined slight from a constructed tournament banned card. There will still be plenty of people playing casual games of all stripes with various banned or restricted cards.
    Agreed with Gwaer. Compensation is a wrong reason to want nerfs.

    The primary reason why I'm an advocate for nerfs (but only in the affected format) is that I would hate to see an archetype fall out of favour completely. With a nerf, the archetype might not work as it did, but it still would.
    The Gamepedia Hex Wiki is always looking for more editors.
    Just go to any page you want to edit and press edit! If it's missing then you can add it.
    Check the Help Section to get started!
    (Optionally, you can make an account, but that's not even required!)

  10. #60
    Master Theorycrafter
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Bakersfield CA
    Posts
    551
    GG hex community, seems, as it always the case on these forums, I am wrong about everything. I can only assume that in my old age my brain has ceased firing with any meaningful card related neurons. As such it would be a waste of both my time, and that of those who read and respond to my posts, for me to continue posting (outside of bug reports and non-opinion things of course) so I'm going to try to refrain from posting on the forum again in the future, if not forever, at least in most situations where I would be tempted to. If I feel the urge, being the opinionated person that I am, to post, I'll just have to pull out my old weird "Al" Yankovich CD and listen to a round of "Everything you know is wrong" to remind myself why I decided not to post again. So yeah, GG WP, see you space cowboys.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •