#1. @clayboyn @eldon1 If this were a single issue proposal (which it is not, as @jacekw has pointed out), it could be structured as:
Which formats should be supported in tournaments?
And the proposal would be Rebellion, Modern, Wild, and Classic.
(Optionally you could also include %'s for each of them).
And then later proposals would deal with the % between foil types and the % between leagues.
But instead, the proposal includes many additional aspects including:
- Regular foil vs Gold foil distribution
- Distribution amongst leagues
In fact, as both jacekw and @jakkal have pointed out, the proposal surreptitiously hides that this is a pretty massive shift from GF to regular, under the guise of "oh we're just getting rid of alpha" as eldon1 suggests.
eldon1 states that we could just refine rf/gf in a different proposal but if this passes, it becomes the entrenched status quo and there will be a lot of inertia making it hard to change. Think of it another way, if it's simply "we'll fix it in a later proposal" then why don't you just initially structure it as "90% GF and 10% to RF and we'll refine it later on?"
#2. I'm really interested to see what Alpha players actually think that Classic is a "compromise to 'alpha holders."
On the surface level it could appear that way but it doesn't take long to realize that any benefits to Alpha are quite minimal and the primary beneficiaries of Classic is Beta and Untamed.
#3. @davemccoy @clayboyn The more I think about it, I think we actually should be going in the opposite direction. Wild is actually problematic for various reasons.
I think a better approach (and one that actually IS a "compromise") would be:
A. Keep the 10% to Rebellion and 45% Modern (and do later votes for distribution between foil types, between leagues, and how top heavy or bottom heavy the prize distribution is for Top X).
B. Instead of 35% Wild and 20% Classic, do something like:
i. 5% Alpha, 5% A/B/U, 5% U/CL, 40% Wild
OR
ii. 5% Alpha, 5% A/B, 5% A/B/U, 5% U/CL, and 35% Wild
Open Wild format is often touted as a way to keep old cards relevant but the problems are two-fold:
Power creep means that newer cards will overshadow older cards
Chaos Legion and especially Rebellion were designed and playtested with only Modern (whatever was Modern at the time) in mind. How Chaos Legion and Rebellion might interact with older cards and what impact it would have on Wild were not considerations. As a result, Wild is a bit of a random mess.
So if you really want to let older cards maintain some use case, then it would be better to keep (on a SMALL scale) some of the older formats. And you don't have to give a lot in prizes (I definitely agree that Alpha prizing should be massively cut down).
REPOSTING MY REPLY (ps we have way to many places these convos are taking place :) )
Byz that's a lot of information to unpack. I like that you are trying to compromise by 1) reduction of alpha only and 2) by including the other older sets (they need love too). I don't agree with you on not including the Rebellion, I think adding Rebellion to be paired with the older sets will INCREASE participation and also increase the fun.
I realize this is a very tough vote to reach any kind of consensus on. I think coming up with more formats is one way to reach a compromise.
We all should be trying to have as much participation as possible, and encourage everyone to go for these prizes. While at the same time it would be necessary to have some of the older cards in these tourneys, so that would increase the utility of those cards as well (thus future demand).
@clayboyn is of course in charge of this process, but that's my opinion. I don't even know if you can amend the vote now before it goes live in game, but I'd be much more comfortable if we had something that you and @jacekw could agree to, but at the same time ended the MASSIVE imbalance we have now. That's why reaching out to the various parties is how best to reach a solution. Its better to have a solution that everyone gets something they want, and at the same time gave something in return.
Whether we have enough time and enough will to compromise on this is the question. I do support the principle of fixing what's broken, the question for me is will you guys compromise and accept that alpha only players need to accept less that what they were getting so that we can all move forward? If yes, then I would consider voting against this (if its too late to fix it), if no, then I think this proposal is way better than doing nothing.
ps. the conversation regarding leagues and foils is another topic as well, and I agree it should also be part of that conversation. But we need people to think in terms of growth overall for me to give validity to the POVs.
I don't really understand what this is about. My braincell was consumed in the other proposal. I just want to say something about this:
"if you really want to let older cards maintain some use case, then it would be better to keep"
Why won't we errata the older cards and buff it? I normally quote Yugioh regarding this. In Yugioh, they have a ban list for certain cards. While these cards are techncally useless since they cannot be used, some still collect it because there are times they were allowed. Raigeki, a card that destroy all opponent's monsters, were banned for like 2 years, I think, then suddenly, it became usable since more cards (after the 2 years) became resistant to destruction effects, therefore, indirectly nerfing Raigeki.
Same as here but the opposite. We can buff some cards and nerf the others. That way, everything is still relevant. Haunted Spirit, for example, if only I can use it in Modern, I would. It is a beta card but even until today, still I think is one of the strongest Death card due to his Heal ability.
So, while the power creep is true, it really isn't true on all cards. I still haven't found a better card than Cerberus for low mana Little League. Actually, even though he is a beta monsters, he even got better with Tarsa, from the Chaos Legion.