Rules Proposal: Keeperships

[DUEL Goblin]

Currently Lem and I are rewriting activity rules, rules about stripping titles and ability to enter tournaments. The rules guide should be updated and Lem will let you know when but I wanted to start a discussion about keepers.

When the towers were created in 2000 by Esper/Mystik/Klytus the game was different. The full 12x12 was not available to everyone so the game was much harder on the low ranks. Foci did not exist. Thus duelists were allowed to challenge at the rank of Enchanter, and the spell Elemental Fury was added as DoM only had new spells and no foci. Also high ranked duelists had to fight in keeper challenges at rank. So challenging Vinny with a Arctic Blast enchanter, he could only use the basic 8 + AB. That rule remains so challenged by a enchanter currently he can only use 1 focus and no mage power.

Neo and I spearheaded probably the biggest change to DoM in its history. The full 12x12 was open to all duelists levelling out the difference between a Wizard or Mage and an apprentice. Foci were added to make the gameplay much faster and provide a rank bonus as a duelist progresses as the added spells were already there.

The results seem to be very good. We've seen a pretty decent increase in activity, a lot of new ranked characters and like six or seven new mages in basically one year. By contrast there was only like one new mage in the five or six years prior. So from an activity and a 'game difficulty' standpoint I think DoM is now much more active and fairer to the newcomers. Also the speed of duels is very quick now - long gone are the days of 14-15 round duels every duel. I average like 6-8 rounds myself.

Lem asked me if the new rules were around would we have designed the keeperships like they did. I had to say no and that three things would be different.

This is three proposals in one.

1. Keeper challenges should no longer have a rule stating that high ranked duelists must duel as if they were the rank of a lower ranked duelist.

2. Keeper challenge rights at some point should be limited to mages (going forwards). Just like Opals and Barons. All other aspects stay the same but the rank restriction rises to mage from enchanter.

3. The spell Elemental Fury should be removed and replaced with an extra focus giving the five keepers 4 foci to use. They would only be able to use this fourth focus against mages+, not against any character lower.

For the first, I think the entirety of the logic behind that rule was that in the past the game was very hard on low ranked characters and that high ranks had a much bigger advantage than now. I don't think it makes sense now.

For the second, I think again the logic was much the same as the first. Reaching mage at 20 WoL versus 15 now was much harder, especially when you started with 8 spells and had to pick one spell per rank. If its much easier now (and the new flurry of mages and others climbing the ranks seems to suggest this is true) then the rule doesn't make much sense.

For the third I don't have as clear of an opinion as the others. I never liked EF. It basically hits everything so it seems like just giving a free point but since you have to be against a keeper its like starting the duel 1-1? It seems like it was designed to speed up duels, but we accomplished that another way. Myself I would rather have a fourth focus, even if I can only use it against mages+. This would make the DoM matrix less complicated because then there's one less spell to remember the results of.

All three proposals make our game more uniform across the duels. I think it would make the keeperships more of a valid title compared to Opal/Baron. It would give mages something to shoot for once they reach 15 wins.

What are your thoughts?

[G]

First, I would say that there isn't a need to be uniform across all three duels. The way the mage towers are challenged make it unique.

Secondly, and in contrast to the above, I would say that I always thought that Mage Towers were always too easy to challenge for. So it interests me to see that become more competitive.

Finally, while it's really awesome to see the increase in participation in Magic, be careful with limiting who can challenge for the Tower. It could, possibly, lower the amount of challenges given for the specific title. One only has to look at Swords to see just how often we get challenges there.

[DUEL Goblin]

Yeah G I didn't mean had to be, but I think for newcomers it might make things easier. 1 week to respond, 2 weeks to fight from DoS is coming here. It'd be nice in DoF. So someone doesn't have to check rules as basic stuff like that is standard.

Yes I did think about that. Though a lot of challenges come from high ranks, and like DoF we allow one per month per person. That wouldn't change.

[Goldglo]

I'm not, personally, a big fan of being able to challenge for the next-to-top rank with just 2 WoL.

However, as G noted, it's a matter of striking balance between who can challenge and how many challenges there are. I also agree that it's not necessary that all 3 sports are uniform in challenge rules/methods.

Still, with the current DoM structure, a new player/character could rack up 2 WoL on their first night of dueling, wait 2 weeks (due to clause #2 in the "Becoming a Keeper" section of the Rules of Rank) and then challenge for a Tower. To me, that just seems too quick and easy.

That being said, it's probably worthwhile to go over data from, say, the last year or so (since DoM-4 was implemented) and see if there was an overall increase in challenges between then and, say, the year or 2 prior to DoM-4.

That will at least give you a starting point to determine if DoM-4 altered the frequency of challenges and subsequently determine if you feel action needs to be taken to increase or decrease that frequency.

--Matt

[DUEL Lem]

I agree with pretty much all of what Raz/Mur said since we've been talking about this for several months.

1. Keeper challenges should no longer have a rule stating that high ranked duelists must duel as if they were the rank of a lower ranked duelist.

That rule was rescinded 1 year ago when DoM4 became official. Neo included it in this post, and he also revised the rules page. I recall he and I talked about rescinding it since DoM4 became much more balanced with the addition of Foci.

2. Keeper challenge rights at some point should be limited to mages (going forwards). Just like Opals and Barons. All other aspects stay the same but the rank restriction rises to mage from enchanter.

I am of the same opinion of Matt that the top ranks should not be acquired with only 2 WoL. With DoM4, it is much easier to make Mage now. Two of our newest mages went from apprentice to mage in less than 4 months. If this rule was adopted, all current non-mage Keepers would be grandfathered in and keep their Towers. They would lose their titles only by losing a challenge match to a mage.

3. The spell Elemental Fury should be removed and replaced with an extra focus giving the five keepers 4 foci to use. They would only be able to use this fourth focus against mages+, not against any character lower.

I have never liked EF, because it's very over powered in my opinion. Like Mur said, if we were creating Towers today in DoM4, I do not think we would have created another spell to add to the matrix that beats almost everything. I tend to think we would add a 4th foci that could only be used against other mages+. I do think it would need to be play tested further. We originally had 4 Foci in the DoM4 tournament last year, and felt like 4 foci seemed to result in foci-bombing (using all foci in the first few rounds). Most of those foci could have been used early because everyone was just trying them out. In the past year, I typically use all 3 foci per duel. 1 foci hits, 1 fails and the 3rd foci hits about 50% of the time. My mage opponents typically have the same success rate against me, so it's usually a wash and merely speeds up the duel. My duels are usually 8 rounds long but still have a few go over 10 rounds.

Another of the drawbacks of EF is that it is only allowable in challenges because it is so powerful. This means that 2 duelists have to completely change their dueling style for a challenge match because neither of them is familiar with dueling with EF. I would prefer to see 2 duelists duel without the added distortion of EF. Foci basically enhance the duelists' normal style of dueling.

That being said, it's probably worthwhile to go over data from, say, the last year or so (since DoM-4 was implemented) and see if there was an overall increase in challenges between then and, say, the year or 2 prior to DoM-4.

That will at least give you a starting point to determine if DoM-4 altered the frequency of challenges and subsequently determine if you feel action needs to be taken to increase or decrease that frequency.

A quick glance looks like:

2010 8 challenges
2011 12 challenges
2012 10 challenges in 7 months
July 2011-July 2012, there have been 17 challenges. DoM4 was introduced in July 2011.

So yes, there has been an increase, but the real question to is me is whether or not there is enough of purpose to continue challenging for the Towers. Personally, the main reason I have never challenged for a tower is because of EF. I'd prefer to duel someone that has access to the same spells and foci that Lem has so that it's an even match. The other reason I have never challenged has been that as a mage, I see no reason to challenge an enchanter or sorcerer since it would look like Lem was trying to beat up on a low rank. If the Keepers are for mage only, I feel like it would make them more desirable and more competitive. As Mur said, there are 7 new mages in the last 12 months. If duelists climb to mage more quickly now, they'll need something other than Archmage to challenge for.

[Nayun]

EF is pretty strong. Its paranoia factor in challenges really outplays it even being used at all. It's overpowered, but at the same time it can't be focused and it's one time use between fights. In clutch situations, where it's 4-4 -- it could be a little overpowered if someone isn't expecting it/expecting it. "They'll either use EF or screw me over while I try to defend against it". Extra focus sounds pretty boss.

I'd have to agree on the whole Mages only being able to challenge for towers. From my POV? I enjoy challenging as an enchanter just for the handicap, makes things a little more fun - but it's not good in the longrun of things. There's not much to do while being mage that everyone else with lesser rank can do. AMT not included, of course.

If it did change to Mages only being able to challenge for Towers, Towers wouldn't be added to ART's anymore - right? If they are somehow retired. Would it be like emeralds then going after a retired opal in a special tournament?

2011 12 challenges
2012 10 challenges in 7 months

I claim six of those! Mine!

[Rachael Blackthorne]

Speaking as a former Keeper who held a Tower under the old rules (basic 8, having to have and maintain minimum Enchanter rank to continue to hold the Tower or else it was stripped immediately), the newer DoM4 players have it much easier when it comes to getting and keeping Towers.

Do I think that the minimum rank for challenging for a Tower other than the Celestial should be raised from Enchanter? Yes, for the reason that Matt gave. It is way too easy also for Experienced Joe Dueler to make or bring in an alternate dueling character, get those two wins, wait two weeks, and challenge for a Tower, then rinse and repeat the process. That sort of loophole in the rules exists as well.

Do I think that the minimum rank for challenging for a Tower other than the Celestial should be raised to Mage? No. Mage is not as easy a rank to achieve as some believe, though I do admit that it is an easier path to get there now than when I started dueling Magic due chiefly to DoM4 equaling the playing field. It is still not an easy rank to achieve when the playing field is limited to a low amount of unique players participating under a host of alternate characters. But this has seemed to be a problem with DoM for years now. DoM4 is helping to make it easier for new people to jump in and play. Keeping them playing is a subject for another thread.

I propose that the minimum rank needed for challenging for and thereafter holding a Tower other than the Celestial should be Sorcerer/Wizard. I further propose that the challenger have also actively participated for a minimum of one full cycle once they gain that rank before they be allowed to challenge for a Tower. Since the Tower holder must be held to activity rules, those who challenge for Towers should demonstrate that they too plan to be active members.

Should the current Tower holders be grandfathered in automatically, if there is a rank change to hold the Tower? I propose a minimum one and maximum two cycle period from when the rank change takes effect, where the current Tower holder would have that time to achieve the rank necessary on their own. If they cannot achieve the needed rank after that period of time, then they would forfeit the Tower and it would go into a Tournament open to those of eligible rank to challenge for it. Speaking from personal experience, that is similar to what I had to do to keep the Air Tower under the old rules, as I was an Apprentice when I won the Tower in the ART, and I had until the following ART to get and maintain Enchanter rank or I'd lose the Tower immediately.

I would hate to have the Keepers lose Elemental Fury, however. That was a fun spell to play out for me in challenge matches and in the Keeper to Keeper matches that I participated in. Yes, EF is an insanely powered spell, but Nether Ray and Immolation are pretty potent ones too. EF is limited to once per match use, and in limited matches, which limits its tactical use. NR and/or IMM can be spammed with impunity against an opponent in any and all matches, and I have heard of/seen that very thing done. Elemental Fury makes having the Tower unique. Otherwise, why name the Towers after the Elements in the first place?

[Harris]

Let me be the first to say, one of the reasons I've liked Magic is the fact that it's not DoS or DoF. It has enough differences to be unique and interesting, and there's a delicate balance between improving the game by making it more uniform without it going stale because it's more uniform. Having three different sports should offer three different things, as opposed to tailoring the sports to all be alike.

Firstly, actually break down those challenge numbers Lem provided. Out of the challenges so far in 2012, 5 of them were issued by non-Mages. That's half. There are currently 17 Mages on the standings. There are also 17 Enchanters to Wizards. Limiting Keeper challenges to just Mages effectively cuts the challenge pool in half. For what reason? To give the title more prestige for the upper ranks by limiting the challenge pool? I think the reason DoM has thrived is because of the lower ranks and cutting them off from Keeper titles seems to be a strange punishment for that to me. It also means the ART won't offer Keeper titles anymore when they go vacant, which to me has always been a boon to that tournament and increases the participation. So my biggest question is, right now what good comes from making the Keeper title Mage only? Is it going to increase challenges or is it more likely to lessen them with a smaller pool?

The fact remains that Mages can challenge for Keeper right now. Just because they may not want to for whatever reason doesn't change that fact. Trying to make Keeper more desirable to the upper ranks is effectively going to cost challenges to do so, as evidenced by the amount of lower ranks that challenge presently. Is it worth that price to *maybe* increase the prestige of the title? Is that going to be a huge boon for the sport in the long run? As I stated before, I think the lower ranks are heavily responsible for keeping DoM churning, and the idea of not liking a titleholder being a low rank primarily stems from the influence of the other two sports. I don't see the negative, in DoM, of a lower rank having a Keeper title. What's the bonafide reason, other than people not personally liking it? Is it hurting the sport somehow?

As far as Elemental Fury is concerned, I love it as a wild card in challenges. It adds an element of strategy out of the blue for both combatants, and for a lower ranked Keeper, it can be clutch. Granted, if you push Keepers to Mage only, then certainly, change it to an additional focus. But as long as the lower ranks can challenge, EF should reasonably stay as it is. If anything I think it should be expanded to allow use during regular hours in matches against upper ranks. An Enchanter Keeper should be able to use EF against Sorcerors and above in my opinion. This allows everyone to familiarize themselves with the spell and actually gives lower ranked Keepers an in game advantage during regular hours that can help push them toward Mage.

[Goldglo]

Something else on the challenge front to consider - especially with the Hydra Tournament going on, I've been really surprised only 1 person challenged for a Tower (Vinny to Serichi for the Tower of Air) and that person isn't part of the event. There are a ton of duelers who could levy challenge, across several ranks.

Granted, Chy's unchallengeable right now and Vinny's still in grace, but that still leaves 2 open Towers, both held by Hydra participants. It might not mean anything overall, but it's just something to note when thinking about whether or not to/how to alter who can challenge for the Keeper rank.

--Matt

[Harris]

Something else on the challenge front to consider - especially with the Hydra Tournament going on, I've been really surprised only 1 person challenged for a Tower (Vinny to Serichi for the Tower of Air) and that person isn't part of the event. There are a ton of duelers who could levy challenge, across several ranks.

Granted, Chy's unchallengeable right now and Vinny's still in grace, but that still leaves 2 open Towers, both held by Hydra participants. It might not mean anything overall, but it's just something to note when thinking about whether or not to/how to alter who can challenge for the Keeper rank.

--Matt

Special events like Hydra shouldn't influence long term sport changes. You don't take an activity snapshot of DoS during March with Madness going on and use that as a basis for numbers/general activity. The same thing applies with Hydra in this case as well.

[DUEL Goblin]

Just to add some things and ask some questions.

A vacant title right now would probably *not* be a tournament or ART. We are looking to have less tournaments not more, so more than likely some kind of regular dueling race (akin to RoK) over 2-3 weeks would be used.

Is there intrinsic value to more challenges? This is taken for granted and personally I think less makes them more special. Personally I measure the success of DoM by just glancing at the standings compared to 2+ years ago, rather than seeing how many challenged in the last year.

For those that like EF is the roleplaying or the in-game bonus of what is essentially a free hit the more appealing?

[Goldglo]

I agree; I just figured if anything, more challenges than normal would be going on right now. They don't seem to be (but there's another 5ish weeks to go for the event). Looking at the whole is always best, but you can also gain some insight with snippets and then vet it out against the long-term to see if the info's worthwhile.

--Matt

[DUEL Lem]

I propose that the minimum rank needed for challenging for and thereafter holding a Tower other than the Celestial should be Sorcerer/Wizard.

DoM rarely has wizards. Even under the basic 8, once someone made it to wizard they typically always made it to mage. Sorcerers are not all that different in new DoM. If they are active, they are gaining rank. It's easier in DoM since we've offered free wins in the ART or Twin Win Nights.

I further propose that the challenger have also actively participated for a minimum of one full cycle once they gain that rank before they be allowed to challenge for a Tower. Since the Tower holder must be held to activity rules, those who challenge for Towers should demonstrate that they too plan to be active members.

Challenge requirements are also being changed to require challengers to meet the same requirement as a Keeper. I had planned to implement/announce those minor changes before these proposals were brought up. These minor changes will be listed in another post later in the week when I have written them as clearly as possible.

Should the current Tower holders be grandfathered in automatically, if there is a rank change to hold the Tower?

I specifically addressed that in my first post. Grandfathered automatically. They will hold the title unless defeated by a mage in a challenge.

Elemental Fury makes having the Tower unique. Otherwise, why name the Towers after the Elements in the first place?

What's the point of the Opals, Diamond, Overlord, Barons? The Opals are elemental, but offer no in game elemental bonus. The original intent of the Towers was not an in game over powered spell. They were created to foster RP. In fact, up until a few years ago Keepers were supposed to be stripped if they did not participate on the message boards once per month. What can be unique about the towers is telling a storyline with them like Seirichi/Spell did.

[Nayun]

Tournaments are fun!

I for one enjoy elemental fury. Not for RP reasons, but for the x-factor. A mage going against an enchanter should have something to be paranoid about. During my match with Vincent, he stopped I believe all of Seirichis elemental fury usage cold. I believe the same was with Candy vs Spell, and that was 1 focus vs 2 +EF. She beat EF 2 out of 3 times and took the Keepership.

I think the lack of challenges in DoM is just one thing; a lack of interest. Real life can get people busy and maybe they don't think they'd have the time to do it justice, or just doesn't see their character being a keeper. So changing it to Wizard/Mages/Etc only would actually limit participation for challenges.

I have to agree with Harris. The reason I was interested in DoM was because of the availability to challenge for Towers easy after gaining two wins and waiting. If a person doesn't like the Keeper having the title at such a low rank - they can challenge him/her themselves. A mage could easily blow away an enchanter if they feel they shouldn't hold the Tower.

[Harris]

For those that like EF is the roleplaying or the in-game bonus of what is essentially a free hit the more appealing?

It's not a free hit. It's an added layer of strategy at almost every level. It's only an overkill/free hit when a higher rank has it. Mage Keeper vs. Enchanter is a fine example. It can turn the tide at a key point for a lower rank if they're the one with it. I've never seen EF as a free hit. You still have to pick your spots with it. And yeah, I'll say that I do like the roleplay involved with it too.

What's the point of the Opals, Diamond, Overlord, Barons? The Opals are elemental, but offer no in game elemental bonus. The original intent of the Towers was not an in game over powered spell. They were created to foster RP. In fact, up until a few years ago Keepers were supposed to be stripped if they did not participate on the message boards once per month. What can be unique about the towers is telling a storyline with them like Seirichi/Spell did.

What rank was Spell when she challenged and created that SL? Not a Mage. What rank was Candy when she decided to take part in that SL and challenge for the tower? Not a Mage.

Fostering RP is something that can be done right now *with all the ranks*, something that the other sports can't do because from their inception they limited the titles to the upper ranks. I'm not suggesting they change that, I'm saying that DoM has a great ability already to create roleplay with titles for *everyone* that the other sports don't have. That shouldn't be seen as a negative, it should be viewed as a unique positive. I'll say it again. You cut your pool in half if you make Keeper a Mage only title. Is having Mages only at Keeper going to somehow increase and foster more RP?

Is there intrinsic value to more challenges? This is taken for granted and personally I think less makes them more special. Personally I measure the success of DoM by just glancing at the standings compared to 2+ years ago, rather than seeing how many challenged in the last year.

I honestly don't know what to say in response to this. Lem cites that challenges have increased, but this is somehow negative? After going through all these changes to increase activity across the board DoM wants *less* challenges now to increase their value? That makes no sense to me. DoM isn't at such a high point that they can start implementing restrictions. DoM4 is barely a year old. It's been a boon for the sport, but going so far as to changing the rules so that there's less of anything seems reckless to me.

Unless there's a good reason to change the status quo, why do it? DoM had the worst parity and was broken before DoM4. That's at least a part of the reason the numbers were so low for all those years. What's broken now that needs fixing, exactly? I don't understand this rush to make more changes as opposed to letting the sport sit for awhile. If it ain't broken, don't break it.