"Peasant" Card Hunter - Low-Powered PvP

Hey Scared Little Girl! As you know, your build has been very influential lately so of course it came up when CT5 and I were discussing possible meta implications in this new format. The lack of Trembling Staff probably hurts but I imagine the deck (or a variant on it) is still quite effective. As I said above, if it becomes dominant, we'll ban items (e.g. Runestone) to make things more fair. Pearwood Staff has Fright but honestly that's not so bad. Fright only rarely hits—you can always push it off with other traits. The one disadvantage I guess of triple wizard is it's harder to put more attachments on your own guys mid-round (I ran Pearwood in my PvP build at one point, but I had a priest pumping Mass Frenzy and Nimbus to push things off). But yeah let's just wait and see how the format shapes up before taking drastic action

Glad you like the idea, and LOL @ the poll comment. As you can see the poll is public vote (click on the # of votes for an option to see who voted for that option). The point wasn't to ask "Do you think this is a good idea," it was to make a list of people who are interested in playing the format so we can find each other more easily. So yeah, vote "Yes" if you want to be on that list. There's no real reason to have other poll options in this case (though I see Nim is enjoying being a naysayer heh).

Yeah, I saw your SP challenge and thought to myself, "I should really hurry up and make this forum post." This has been in the works for a few weeks now, and it was on my mind for a while before then. Obviously playing with purples and oranges is fun, but the games I've played in this format have been closer and more interesting than most of my actual PvP matches. I definitely like the idea of pauper SP challenges, by the way, so here's hoping the devs listen to you

 

I like the idea very much, would like if they made it official.
Maybe have another clickable box under "allow gm" that says "peasent mode", shouldn't be difficult to do I think, very similar to handicap mode only with rarity limitations.
In fact, now that I think about it, it would also be very interesting to fight a peasant MOM.
More options add more depth and there's definitely potential in these sort of things.

 

Here's hoping
In the meantime, we'll have to sneak around and invite each other to casual matches

(If they made ranked peasant we'd probably want to track separate ratings.)

 

Oh well oh well... how very much I like this absolutely interesting Idea.

It will be the death of mine but... oh well oh well... as long as you don't mind fighting against a running frag... count me in.
(I know for sure I'll loose very very often... I am not good in normal MP... how bad will I be in Peasant MP?)

Now... that means I need to make a new version of my (still not fully developed) build.

*cuddles*
Sisquinanamook

 

Hi Sisquinanamook, glad you like the idea. Don't worry about being good or bad, I imagine there'll be a spectrum of skill exactly like in normal PvP and that the only way to improve will be to play and spectate a lot. You can do it!

 

I agree with people voicing that WoW is OP for this format. Although that match against CT is close, I had really bad draws. I only drew 2 WoWs in the first 2 turns which resulted in one of the wiz dying at T3. Still, the 2 remaining wizs managed to stall long enough for victory. Also I got the feeling that CT tweaked his build against mine with all the push teams with 2 range attacks since I announced what I was using in chat. No to take anything away from him of course. Well fought.

 

He didn't tweak his build for you, he was running exactly what he ran against me. He also made a couple crucial misplays. It was definitely a good game, and I'd like to see more games before we conclude that SLGlite is dominant.

 

I think that this format might be interesting at levels 7-13, where characters have less total power tokens and no access to . It would also make for a smaller gap between racial hp, which might help elves a little (or maybe not, just guessing).

 

i like the idea, it will help remove many powerful items that grinders are able to get. although there are other powerful items in this context, they are easier to get to than those rare and legendary cookie cutter items. this will help even out the field and increase the odds for those who do not grind for the best cards.

 

So I played my first game of peasant against someone who wasn't CT5 yesterday. My opponent was Bearson Onyx and I had fun. He might have more insightful comments as to how the match went: we didn't do much post-game analysis so I don't know what went wrong for him, either build- or draw-wise. But after the game he still seemed interested in the format, which is awesome. I hope to play more of you soon, but it's kind of hard to arrange it. It's kinda like... get into the lobby, look around, ask if anyone wants to play some peasant. You can check the poll in this thread and click on the # of people who voted "Yes" to get a list of folks who 'signed up' as it were.

 

This is very cool!

 

me 2, hopefully during weekends when i have more free time. hang it, where are you again? i am in singapore man... GMT+8...

 

I'm still the only no vote, so lonely

 

I would vote "no" just so you are not so lonely anymore.... but
a) I already voted
b) I think it is just too good of an idea to be voted down
c) I'd need to create a second account in the Forum and I don't think BM would like this.

So it comes down to this:

Take this little Carebear called "Friend" - so you are not alone anymore.

*cuddles*
Sisquinanamook

 

That's not called lonely. That's called special!

 

But the question wasn't, "do I think it would be a good idea to add such a format?" I think it's a great idea! However it just asks if I'd be interested in playing the format myself, which I ain't.

 

Woops... my bad.
You're right. Sorry

 

Aha! That makes sense

kelsier—I'm in California (GMT-8). By the way, love those books!

 

Yup, due to being at work almost non stop this week I unfortunately got to play only once, but I've actually modified my peasent build a bit and am looking forward to the next match.
Probably the only card I'm really missing is Mass Frenzy, all the rest of the "downgrades" are less noticable for me and make the game very interesting.
Other than that it's just a matter of experimentation and personal taste (you know my disdain for playing mages although anything's possible).
Another plus is that losing didn't feel cheap as sometimes happen when facing some of the OP cards (no need to repeat them - everyone knows), and the game felt much more tactical because of the lack of those cards.
As to what went wrong - well, I ask myself that after each match with you, what is it now 0-3 for you I believe?
Next time, though... oh, next time.

 

Played more peasant yesterday and today. Fun format still IMO, awesome to be seeing so many others suiting up for it. A few observations so far.
• high-level items (e.g. double-edged, bejeweled) are good.
• triple dwarf control is semi-viable but people seem afraid of running pearwood staves and their deck quality suffers as a result.

My win-loss ratio is pretty ridiculous (luck?). I'm also 1-0 vs. TDC and 1-0 vs. Bejeweled Shortsword.deck—tiny sample sizes, but at first blush these strategies don't seem impossible to beat. I've played mostly players in the 1300-1600 rating range so we're not talking noobs, either.

Anyway, before banning Runestones or Level17+ items, I'd really like to see more data. If anyone plays peasant, please report your games here. With playtest data, rather than armchair claims, we can figure out if the format needs a ban list or not.