Is that a real question? There is only one ladder: Ranked play mode of course.
It was a rhetorical question.
A ladder in a card game could be organized in many ways. Deck building is a skill itself and it is absolutely missing in the current ranked play mode, because everyone picks a META deck and plays it.
The aim of this thread is to create a different type of ladder, where deck innovation matters most.
As I said, you are aiming at the wrong mode. Casual is the place where it might make sense to implement your idea if it works. Ranked is the place where People try to beat each other to get stars (and pros eventually get HTC Points). Why should you allow to provide suboptimal decks with weaker opponents. That is not a competetive Approach and, thus, shouldn't be used in a competetive environment.
They are all not reasons for enabling People to climb ladder with competetively bad decks. Bad decks shouldn't be able to climb, since then you do not have a copmpetetive environment and devalue getting to the top of the ladder. Plus the issue I emntioned in my edit of generating difficulties to counter the meta with (at that time) off meta decks.
In casual, that could work, in ranked, it is a stupid idea,
Of course you can't. What you can do is match non-meta decks with other non-meta decks and give the players the freedom to choose whether they want to play a meta deck or not. Right now climbing with non-meta deck is extremely hard and not possible for the majority of players.
But why should someone be able to climb ladder with a competetively bad deck?
Define bad deck, please. There are not bad and good decks in the game. There are just meta and off-meta decks.
You can call them what you want, but I think it is pretty clear what I mean with "competetively bad deck". Good decks are meta decks and bad decks are what you call off meta decks. Compared to meta decks, your off-meta decks are performing poorly. Otherwise you wouldn't be complaining about meeting "meta-decks" with them.
If you have a suboptimally working deck, you shouldn't be able to climb. Period. What you should be able to Play it possibly successfully in a non-competetive envirenment (which is also only rarely possible at present and which is a problem).
Edit: And there is another issue with your idea: A good player will study the meta and then try to counter the most common decks by building something new or newish. Such a counter could then not meet ist Prey, because it would likely be an "off-meta" deck making it impossible to target meta decks with something new.
Of course you can't. What you can do is match non-meta decks with other non-meta decks and give the players the freedom to choose whether they want to play a meta deck or not. Right now climbing with non-meta deck is extremely hard and not possible for the majority of players.
I get that there should be a place where People with very incomplete collections are able to play bad/whacky decks and have a shot at winning the game. But I think this can only be a mode where you cannot earn any rewards to make winning as unnecessary as possible.
But why should someone be able to climb ladder with a competetively bad deck? That kind of completely contradicts the purpose of ladder.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
⚙
Learn More
Cosmetics
Related Cards
Card Pools
✕
×
PopCard Settings
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Elements settings
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
Then you have no clue what the ladder is for.
They are all not reasons for enabling People to climb ladder with competetively bad decks. Bad decks shouldn't be able to climb, since then you do not have a copmpetetive environment and devalue getting to the top of the ladder. Plus the issue I emntioned in my edit of generating difficulties to counter the meta with (at that time) off meta decks.
In casual, that could work, in ranked, it is a stupid idea,