I've not really played much recently, but I'm certain the stale metagame is probably pretty suffocating. I propose that we, as a community, choose to abide by a community-maintained banlist. The point of the banlist is not to prevent oppressive decks and strategies as it normally is. Instead, we ban things in order to create a fun environment. What do you all think?
If we were to do this, we would suggest cards to be banned along with the period for which they're banned and a reason for the banning.
For example (an example only, not a representation of the metagame):
I propose that we ban Maxxor, Protector of Perim for three months. I believe that with the banning of this card, Mippedian Warbeast decks would have the chance in the metagame bringing them from tier 2 to tier 1.
We would then conduct voting for an undecided period. I don't know how active the community is, so I have a hard time of knowing how long it would take before we have a good sample of votes. I believe testing in sparing amounts could be fruitful. However, do too much testing and it's possible to crack the metagame before it's even implemented.
The banlist would be a rolling release. Each card that has been chosen to be banned would be banned on the first day of the following month. In turn, each card that is at the end of it's ban term would be un-banned on the first of the month.
EDIT:
I think that, if we were to do this, we'd also need a list of oppressive cards. These would not follow the same model as the other list.
If we were to do this, we would suggest cards to be banned along with the period for which they're banned and a reason for the banning.
For example (an example only, not a representation of the metagame):
I propose that we ban Maxxor, Protector of Perim for three months. I believe that with the banning of this card, Mippedian Warbeast decks would have the chance in the metagame bringing them from tier 2 to tier 1.
We would then conduct voting for an undecided period. I don't know how active the community is, so I have a hard time of knowing how long it would take before we have a good sample of votes. I believe testing in sparing amounts could be fruitful. However, do too much testing and it's possible to crack the metagame before it's even implemented.
The banlist would be a rolling release. Each card that has been chosen to be banned would be banned on the first day of the following month. In turn, each card that is at the end of it's ban term would be un-banned on the first of the month.
EDIT:
I think that, if we were to do this, we'd also need a list of oppressive cards. These would not follow the same model as the other list.
Last edited by brainard52 on Fri Mar 27, 2015 7:40 pm; edited 2 times in total