Glass vs Emerald: Something of a Study

[Velhelmi Torvald]

I contend that there wide chasm between Glass and Emerald. I will share with you the problems as I see them and give some suggestions in the hopes of bring up a discussion. If the most common complaint is “Why do you use mods against new people?” My concern is not the ranked using mods, but rather the mods themselves and the relationship it shares against the unskilled and/of unranked.

With others having raised their voices in the past and people, myself included, browbeating them into submission, perhaps a new approach of listening to the complaints and looking a bit deeper into the complaint itself is in order? Rather than complain, I offer you over 4,200 words and of effort in attempting to investigate my position.

Yes, this is long. Please forgive any errors.

Disclaimers

What this is NOT:

I am not speaking as a voice of authority. I am not claiming "This game is broken!" This is not telling people they should refrain from engaging the use of their mods on lower ranks. This is not about me whining about not gaining rank. Likewise, I've heard the arguments concerning alts, practice and scouting. I engage in these practices. I have also been dueling like mad and think I have more duels under my belt than any other over the time I've been here (if not, not many have more). It's not 17 years, but I’m not talking from a point of total ignorance as I understand matrix dueling well enough.

I am very aware of my stance when I wrote those long, dramatic posts started by Wild Irish Rover. I still agree with the overall sentiment behind what I've said (use mods, win and be proud of winning, practice a lot and get used to being hit so you’ll get better faster). While I have not reread those posts while writing this one, I do not think that too much of what I'm writing here will be too contradictory. However, perhaps the spirit behind them has eroded a bit. I can only allow you to judge that and question why I may have said one thing then and something else now and if called upon, I will answer them best I can.

What this is:

An argument concerning the fundamental nature of the matrix, how it operates between the sport's lowest rank and the sport's highest non-titled rank and putting into question the logic behind many of the differences. One comment point of advice is to "not duel Emeralds". Well, I question the wisdom of leaving a large chunk of available duelists unavailable to the ranks who are also told to "duel like crazy" with a small group of reoccurring and available duelists any given night.

Opening:

Please try to be open. I feel that some longer tenured and/or successful duelists may want to automatically dismiss what I'm saying here with a wave of their hand or possibly a snarky comment, but please appreciate that this isn't written on a whim and I put a good deal of time and thought into this, as well as having discussed it with several other players on both sides. I'm sure they will repeat their arguments as I am doing now. If my efforts are for some reason misguided, I apologize in advance.




Concerning Glass vs Emerald:

I think that the scoring system is unbalanced. The difference between .5 and 1 via DoS and DoM can be overcome. But not only is the difference between ADV and 1 vast, but it also opens up moves in ways that aren't available to the lower ranks. Add in the quantity of modifications and you are up against an experienced dealer using a stacked deck. That is the crux of my arguments.

Potential Scoring Difference

In DoS, a Warlord has four Fancies that cause only a defensive move to change from .5 to 1 point. If a Warlord lands four fancy defenses and a commoner lands four regular the difference is...

+2

In DoM, a Mage has if a Mage lands all three Foci and the Mage lands the same three moves, the difference is...

+1.5

In DoF, if an Emerald lands all five Fancies (negating the unlikely but possible circumstance that the sixth comes into play should all five land), and the Glass lands the same five, the difference is...

+3 - +5 (possibly +3 - +6)

+ 3 is only if the Glass manages to twice convert, itself a difficult task as the Emerald (or any other) can negate simply by opting to defend their next move. + 4 if one conversion is made and the other three are lost, and + 5 is if none of the ADV are converted. While it's uncommon that any Warlord/Mage/Emerald lands all of their mods, the discrepancy in the potential scoring difference is obvious and for good reason, Fists has stronger mods and more of them.


Examples of How Moves Change Against Fancies

Jab:

A Glass has one move to 1 point against Jab, which is Flip. With mods, this number changes to four. Flip, Duck, Dodge and Arm Block. A big and obvious difference, but those new moves will be revisited.

The imbalance here is simple: If a Glass misses with Flip, Jab is a safe move. You win every exchange with offense, trade with Jab/Chop and only give up a non-point to defense you can defend away. So long as the score isn't something like, 4-3 and you fear the trade to end the match, there's little downside to this decision.

Subsequently, if an Emerald misses Flip and is behind? Fancy Dodge/Duck/Arm Block are all perfectly legitimate moves with Arm Block being sweet in this situation. That post-Flip Jab doesn't look so good.

Leg Sweep:

In Glass vs Glass, a missed Leg Sweep is not terrible. Your opponent may go for an easy defensive move, or they may go for Flip and Jab is still a good move and a follow-up Sweep are all good in this situation. So you're pretty much where you are most of the duel, picking between the Triforce of Glass moves with an some defense thrown in there to keep people honest.

Likewise, how does a Glass go about attacking a Fancied defense if a Leg Sweep in missed? Once sweep is used, the likeliest move from Emerald will be defensive. Your options as a glass is to either defend to negate a mod or try for a Hook or Spin Kick, neither of which land against all three and lose to all the major offensive moves. Either way, this is bad news for the Glass and a low percentage scoring round.

Flip:

A great offensive move against Glass, against rank it becomes more of a risky widow to bed against Emeralds. The primary tool against Jab (and to a lesser extent, Jump Kick and Chop), it now loses you a full point against the popular Dodge and almost as popular Duck, in addition to Snap and Sweep, both common moves. Its saving grace is scoring against Arm Block, however Arm Block is the least attractive of the three maidens for this reason and subsequently the move used least frequently of the Big 3 Emeralds.

The Big 3 Glass vs The Big 3 Emerald:

For a Glass, generally, its main arsenal are the moves Jab, Flip and Leg Sweep

An Emerald still uses these but Flip is not as common and more likely replaced with Jump and Snap. All arguable, but this is not the focus. With the addition of mods, the moves Dodge, Duck and Arm Block become the three sexy sisters once they’re all grown up. With a Fancy, each of these moves only lose to three moves each and there is only one move that defeats all three.

What are the moves they lose to?

Arm Block: Sweep, Spin, Flip
Dodge: Sweep, Spin, Hook
Duck: Sweep, Chop, Snap Kick

Of the three main weapons of the Glass, Jab loses to all, Sweep defeats all, Flip beats one, loses to the other two. What's a Glass to do if they miss their Leg Sweep?

Well, Jump Kick and Snap Kick are popular enough. How do they fare?

Jump Kick - Loses to all 3
Snap Kick – Beats Duck, Loses to Arm Block and Dodge

Well, that's no good either. What about Chop? That's not useless.

Chop - Wins vs Duck, Loses to Arm Block and Dodge

Those are the same results as Snap Kick! What about Uppercut? I use that when I'm feeling cheeky...

Uppercut: Loses to all 3

Those are the same results as Jump Kick! So against three powerful defensive moves, we have copied results…

JK and UC = Lose vs AB, DO and DK
SnK and Chop = Wins vs Duck, Loses to Arm Block and Dodge

That's weird. Why was it made that way? Maybe no one saw this when they made the matrix? There has to something to use against these moves. What’s left?

Hook and Spin Kick

HK: Beats Dodge, Loses to Duck and Arm Block (and almost everything else of consequence)
SpK: Beats Arm Block and Dodge, Loses to Duck (and every other offensive move)

What can you say? Aside from Sweep, the only offensive alternative that defeats more than one of these is Spin Kick, which also loses to every single offensive move, in addition to Duck. The only other move to hit Dodge is Hook, which is just about its only useful function since no one is going to use it to try to catch Leap or Spin Kick unless they have nothing to lose. So the tools to use against these defenses no matter what the situation are limited and can prompt one to want to use Sweep constantly, and if one misses with it, the next round is something of a horror show of offensive selections, or must defend with the best result being earning a point that doesn't maybe wont count.

Fancy Dodge

When is it not a good time to use this move against a Glass? Duck and Arm Block are powerful but both lose to two common/semi-common moves. Dodge loses to Sweep, the situational but risky Spin Kick and the almost useless Hook. The only round this is not a good move is the round you think the Glass will sweep you off your feet or might be considering a defensive move themselves. In the latter case it's still a good time to use it as you have six modifiers at your disposal and can fire them off without worry.

How is this different from other ranks? Feints of course. The natural disaster to Fancy Dodge is something like Feint Jab. This turns the game on its head and changes it into something different and is probably the appeal of the sport. The Glass rank does not have this tool and so by simply using the defensive moves many times over against an opponent whose best and most reliable scoring methods are offensive moves and the seesaw tilt becomes apparent.

ADV:

The ADV is the bastard stepchild of the dueling scoring system. It’s the only non-scoring score. A successful Glass defense often has no other net benefits, other than psychological bamboozlement, to using defense consistently. This gets into the nature of the ADV. Often times being right leaves one uncompensated. An ADV is only good if you can convert it, a feat which is easily thwarted by the opponent choosing to use a defense themselves.



Sample Duel 1: Glass vs Emerald

01. Leg Sweep – Jab 0-1
02. Dodge – Fancy Dodge 0-1
03. Duck – Jab 0+-1
04. Leap – Leg Sweep 1-1
05. Leg Sweep – Fancy Dodge 2-1
06. Dodge – Jab 2+-1
07. Leg Sweep – Fancy Dodge 3-1
08. Snap Kick – Jump Kick 3-2
09. Flip – Jab 4-2
10. Snap Kick – Jump Kick 4-3
11. Leg Sweep – Leg Sweep 5-4

The score says 5-4. When I look at this, I see something very different. The opponent scored three times, R1, R8 and R10. There was one trade, R11. Glass scored six times, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R9. Three were three Glass defenses, once converted. There were three Emerald Fancies, none landed.

So, if all moves were being counted as equal, this was a 6-3 (or 7-4 w/ trade) duel. How do you out guess your opponent twice as much and only end by winning by one? I would also add that in this duel, R2 (Dodge - Fancy Dodge) I also consider a correct round, akin to Disengaging to thwart an incoming Fancy, but with the Fancies here more powerful, it's importance is heightened. Does it deserve a score? Of course not, but the importance is felt. After the duel, this opponent IMed me and commented how it felt like I was reading their mind. This stuck with me because I too felt I had this match under control from the very beginning, yet it was in no way reflected in the score, from my perspective.

It got me wondering about the difference the mods made in real duels. This was my most recent duel.

Sample Duel 2: Glass vs Emerald

01. Dodge – Fancy Dodge 0-0
02. Jab – Snap Kick 1-0
03. Leg Sweep – Leg Sweep 2-1
04. Dodge – Fancy Duck 2-1
05. Jab – Jab 3-2
06. Jump Kick – Fancy Dodge 3-3
07. Leg Sweep – Leg Sweep 4-4
08. Chop – Fancy Dodge 5-4

What can I say? Four fancies in eight rounds, three Fancy Dodges including the opener, three trades leading to a 2-1 loss, both points by Fancy. I perceive this to be an obvious steamrolling effort (and I’m not critical of the steamrolling effort). Is it safe to assume that had the duel continued the other two mods would have been seen? Maybe. Maybe not. What does this duel look like reversed the ranks, I wonder?

Sample Duel 2: REVERSED Emerald vs Glass

01. Fancy Dodge – Dodge 0-0
02. Jab – Snap Kick 1-0
03. Leg Sweep – Leg Sweep 2-1
04. Fancy Dodge – Duck 2-1
05. Jab – Jab 3-2
06. Jump Kick – Dodge 3-2+
07. Leg Sweep – Leg Sweep 4-3
08. Chop – Dodge 4-3+

Oh, the duel isn’t over yet. Weird, huh? I’m winning without landing a Fancy. What do you think my next move should me? Fancy Dodge works well for me here, don’t you think? Unless opponent Sweeps, I either win or am up 4-3 and negate that ADV.

I’ll pick another duel at random vs an Emerald, just to compare.

Sample Duel 3: Glass vs Emerald

01. Flip – Snap Kick 0-1
02. Dodge – Leg Sweep 0-2
03. Leg Sweep – Snap Kick 0-3
04. Flip – Jab 1-3
05. Jump Kick - Fancy Arm Block 1-4
06. Leg Sweep – Fancy Dodge 2-4
07. Snap Kick – Leg Sweep 3-4
08. Dodge – Jab 3+-4
09. Duck – Jump Kick 4-4
10. Leg Sweep – Jab 4-5

Hmm… this was a 5-5 duel. Fancy Arm Block after Flip, converted defense, caught looking for a fancy at the end and only two defenses used with one landed. Not much in this one that suggests fancy made a huge impact. Reversed?


Sample Duel 3: REVERSED Emerald vs Glass

01. Flip – Snap Kick 0-1
02. Fancy Dodge – Leg Sweep 0-2
03. Leg Sweep – Snap Kick 0-3
04. Flip – Jab 1-3
05. Jump Kick - Arm Block 1-3+
06. Leg Sweep – Dodge 2-3
07. Snap Kick – Leg Sweep 3-3
08. Fancy Dodge – Jab 4-3
09. Fancy Duck – Jump Kick 5-3
10. Leg Sweep – Jab N/A

Wow, now that’s something else, isn’t it? From 5-4 loss in 10 to 5-3 win in 9. That’s a pretty big swing 3 point swing in the scoring simply by changing the availability of modifiers. What do you say, one more?

Sample Duel 4: Glass vs Emerald

01. Snap Kick – Jab 0-1
02. Dodge - Leg Sweep 0-2
03. Leg Sweep – Uppercut 1-2
04. Snap Kick – Flip 2-2
05. Leg Sweep – Fancy Dodge 3-2
06. Chop – Fancy Duck 4-2
07. Jab - Fancy Dodge 4-3
08. Chop – Jab 5-4

Not much to say with this one. Only one Fancy landed. Ranks reversed turns this into a 5-3 victory (Fancy Dodge score negated).

Final example. Remember the first duel, the one where I said I felt like I had it secured from the beginning? Ranks reversing…

Sample Duel 1: REVERSED Emerald vs Glass

01. Leg Sweep – Jab 0-1
02. Fancy Dodge – Dodge 0-1
03. Fancy Duck – Jab 1-1
04. Fancy Leap – Leg Sweep 2-1
05. Leg Sweep – Dodge 3-1
06. Fancy Dodge – Jab 4-1
07. Leg Sweep – Fancy Dodge 5-1
08. Snap Kick – Jump Kick N/A
09. Flip – Jab N/A
10. Snap Kick – Jump Kick N/A
11. Leg Sweep – Leg Sweep N/A

It turns into 5-1 victory in 7, instead of a 5-4 victory in 11. It’s quite marvelous when you look at it like this.

I’m sure we could find dramatic swings in the scores with all of the ranks in all the sports, but these were from my own collection and the last two picked at random (random by selecting someone I’ve dueled multiple times and picking the first duel with them I found). This may not conclusive of a scoring issue but it does have a strong suggestion that links with the discrepancy in potential scoring difference due to mods mentioned earlier. It would be interesting to take a large sample of Glass vs Emerald matches and in addition to rank reversal, changing the moves to all fancies. In this small sample, the shift when considering the is dramatic a couple of these.

One turns a close, long win into a quick and easy win, a loss into a win, lost duel into a winning position and the last only a one point shift. What would be interesting would be to have a collection of Lowest vs Highest duels and play around with to see what the discrepancies are. One may not be able to come to any conclusive evidence as things like duelist skill would not be accounted for and simply shifting fanices from one side to the other does not mean that the duelists would fight the same duel under the same circumstances. On the other hand I think it worth investigating further.


Feints:

This is not much of an issue overall. As a Glass, I’ve only had a few used against me, have not heard other Glass complain much about this and only once that I can recall did I alter my choice of move due to the thought of a possible incoming Feint and it was in the final round of my most recent duel.

Questions:

Is DoF the “hard” Duel?

I’ve had this argument spring up a couple of times. Swords is the most balanced of the games. It’s fun, easy to learn, the matrix is small, compact and uncomplicated. Everything feels right while you play and it’s worst quality is going for an obvious 50/50 and losing. I’ve played DoM a few times and practiced many more and I have to say that I rather liked it this time around. None of the moves felt overpowered and I liked the Focus system. It’s a neat little twist to have a 1.5 move or a 1-.5 trade. If there’s a criticism, maybe it’s that it’s too balanced and many moves feel perfectly viable at the same time rather than a couple. But if your biggest fault is a nitpick then you’re doing a good job.

DoF, in contrast is the most challenging. An argument I've heard is that to make alterations to ease the burden between Glass and Emerald would make it too much like Swords and “kill” the game. I take this kind of talk as hyperbole as "kill", in this instance means, "change". If the opposite of the 1.5 is the ADV, then the game is the opposite of balanced. 3 Foci to 6 Fancy/Feints comes across as excessive. I would argue that the matrix and mod system are the most unfriendly to new people unless they only fight each other.

If this statement is correct, and there is no desire for alterations, should it not be labeled as such as a potential warning to incoming players?

Is suggesting rank segregation in order to achieve rank advancements a good idea?:

If my analysis is correct and alterations are not made, is that preferable to encouraging all ranks to duel anyone available? The reason why I ask is because it’s hard for me to justify this indulgence. With a good night’s turnout of 15 in rooms and some of which are there only to RP, is not the goal to attract more players and to retain them?

This is the major shift in my previous posts that I’ve made. I have felt the frustration of dueling against rank and how difficult it has been. Asking ranks use mods against the non/low ranks may have been a bit misguided but I now feel that it was coming from someone who’s been steamrolled. I don’t know. What I do know is dueling like that is not fun. You can feel like closing your eyes and throwing a dart to choose your move. While I am sure there are those who have gone against the gain and succeeded, maybe there are plenty others who are ashes against the grain who’d still be around otherwise. I don’t know this either.

Has Wild Irish Rover dueled since that post was put up?

Is nothing wrong with DoF

Of course I must ask this. Sometimes people will say, “There’s nothing wrong with the DoF” and then followup with statements like, “The problem is…” and declare one issue the problem.

Is the problem the higher ranks beating up on the lowbodies... or not having enough lowbodies?

Let me answer that question with another question… If the problem not enough bodies, how is this fixed? If there are not enough bodies and the higher ranks beat up the lower ranks, then why not bring in more balance in an attempt to fix both?


Suggestions:

I don’t know if these are good but this is what I have. Maybe you think these are bad ideas for reasons I have not thought up. Maybe you have more ideas or better ideas. These are mine.

.5 Scores:

The most obvious is for direct compensation for a successful round. Matrix opened to all for the same reasons. Glass vs Glass matches would look different but would also be more balanced with Glass vs Rank.

Carry over advantages:

If the taste of .5 be considered unpalatable, strengthen the ADV. Rather than an ADV being lost the next round if not converted, have be carried over if both duelists defend the next round. If ADV player switches from defense to offense, then it is lost. I can figure out role play rationales for this very easily and could display a few if called upon.

Matrix adjustments:

The matrix has some ugly spots that work against the Glass where there are Fancies involved. Weaken some moves, strengthen others: Fancy Dodge is a monster while others moves like Hook and Leg Block are either terribly situational or near useless other than for psychological warfare. A better balance with some of the moves and giving duelists more options may be better. The changes need not be dramtic, but having Hook hit Arm Block or and the Big 3 defense losing to an additional move might be beneficial.

Fewer Mods:

With the strength of the mods being as potent as they are, fewer mods is also an option. Many wonder why more mods are given to the higher ranks than are needed to win a duel. This option is more of a band aid than a solution. However, six is a silly number. When you can win the game using nothing but mods and still have something leftover, it seems excessive, more so when lower ranks are hit with many Fancy Dodge.

Accepting duels with no/few mods:

I also consider this a cheap band-aid fix. It places the pressure on the new people and we know that everyone is not going to be willing to do this or offer it from the good gracious parts of their heart. Likewise, one’s own inclination towards working for one’s own self interest with eventually, and rightfully I would argue, win out and this discussion will happen again.


Conclusion
The analogy I used when talking last night about Glass vs Emerald was "trying to walk to the top of a seesaw with no one sitting on it." It's not quite accurate as it's not impossible to beat an Emerald using all of their fancies in dominant fashion, but it's very difficult and one needs to be very careful in their decision making in order to achieve it. Emeralds have more tools. Their moves are more effective and more efficient leading to the easier accumulation of wins for those advantages. If the game is trying to attract and retain new players my suggestions are to either balance the matrix to give Glass more tools, to cut back on the number of mods dealt out or to strengthen the ADV. If the game wants to be retained as it is, is a simple warning that Fists is considered more difficult (at least in this regard) unwarranted?

These are my thoughts and opinions. What I call "balance" others may want to call "watered down". I used the latter phrase myself in the Wild Irish Rover post. Maybe the difference between a Glass and an Emerald is not as large to you as it is to me. Maybe it's bigger. While I know the Fancy/Feint system has been changed three times over the years, I have to wonder if the matrix has undergone any changes?


I eagerly await your responses.

[Seirichi]

I went to the Outback tonight. On a glass. I fought an Emerald. I'll show you the results below.

DUEL Jasper: Psly fakes it like a woman. Jesse nails him like a man. 1-0 Spellbound. (feint snap/jab)
DUEL Jasper: Psly needs to stop talking and start hitting, cause Jesse still thinks she wears the pants in this dueling relationship. (jumpkick/flip) 2-0
DUEL Jasper: <B> Everybody was kung fu fighting. Oh wait, no they weren't. 2-0 Spellbook. (legblock/dodge)</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B> 2+-0 (jab/armblock) Spelltastic.</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B>3-0 Spelleroonie (dodge/sweep)</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B> 4-0 (flip/uc*) Spelldorama.</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B> 4-0 Spellder. (fncy ab/dodge)</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B> 5-0 Spelltastic. (sweep/jab)</B>

Turn those non-fancied defenses into fancies, it would of still been null'd or beat.

*That's an UPPERCUT, FOLKS

I read your post. It's too much comparing Glass vs Emerald and Emerald vs Glass. There's a larger game than just those two ranks and a meta game of the Feint and Fancy system that makes DoF great. Looking at it just from Glass-POV alone isn't the greatest of ideas. I'm not sure if you've ever had an Emerald before, or if anyone who you've spoken with at length who have spoken against the system has ever had one. It's a totally different game when you rank up that might be hard for those of Glass-rank to understand.

[Seirichi]

Fewer Mods:

With the strength of the mods being as potent as they are, fewer mods is also an option. Many wonder why more mods are given to the higher ranks than are needed to win a duel. This option is more of a band aid than a solution. However, six is a silly number. When you can win the game using nothing but mods and still have something leftover, it seems excessive, more so when lower ranks are hit with many Fancy Dodge.

Taking away mods would also damage end-game content for Emerald vs Emerald fighting. It's not about just fancies, it's about feint usage as well.

[Seirichi]

DUEL Jasper: Psly fakes it like a woman. Jesse nails him like a man. 1-0 Spellbound. (feint snap/jab)
DUEL Jasper: Psly needs to stop talking and start hitting, cause Jesse still thinks she wears the pants in this dueling relationship. (jumpkick/flip) 2-0
DUEL Jasper: <B> Everybody was kung fu fighting. Oh wait, no they weren't. 2-0 Spellbook. (legblock/dodge)</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B> 2+-0 (jab/armblock) Spelltastic.</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B>3-0 Spelleroonie (dodge/sweep)</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B> 4-0 (flip/uc*) Spelldorama.</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B> 4-0 Spellder. (fncy ab/dodge)</B>
DUEL Jasper: <B> 5-0 Spelltastic. (sweep/jab)</B>

I'd also like to note strategic points of the fight that came from the usage of ADV's. If it was .5, would Psly have dodged after mine to try and null a possible advancement or a counter attack by me? I doubt it. Advances allow for mindgames. "Will he defend again, will he attack?" It's that 50/50 that makes not only an Emerald, but should make all ranks of DoF think. Will you try and defend to null their defense or possible counter attack? Will you attack because you smell they might not use their second advance chance to make a point because they want to exploit you because you've been put on tilt because of the advantage?

.5 wouldn't allow for this, and that's why I believe it would hurt the game.

[Jake]

There's a lot of meat here to respond to, which will take some time to mull over and answer appropriately.

Some quick thoughts.

Clarification to the "duel like mad" and "avoid Emeralds" comments above.

Candy (and others) have suggested dueling like mad as a means of learning the matrix and getting a feel for the duel. When you are not concerned with gaining rank, and just want to learn what it's all about. That's still good advice.

If you are attempting to gain rank (after gaining a feel for the game), then it makes sense to be more selective about who you choose to duel. This is true of DoS, DoF, DoM, chess, go, or any other game of skill. It makes sense to choose to fight/duel/play against people closer to your own rank/skill level.

I like chess. I have no illusions that I am playing at grandmaster level, and fully recognize I am going to get crushed if I play them. But, sometimes it can be worthwhile as a learning exercise. Still, most of the time, now that I know the game, I try to seek opponents of similar skill.

So, anyway, the long and short of it is, both pieces of advice are still good, they just weren't mean to be used in conjunction. Use the duel like mad (and don't worry about rank) while trying to learn the matrix, and then when you are ready to try and gain rank, be more selective.

[Jake]

Again, there's a lot of meat to digest and process, but a thought about the Fancy / Feint system.

Regarding the Feints, they are useless against duelers that don't use defenses. Beginners quickly learn that aggression is the means to scoring (until you master the trick to linking Advs), so in general Feints are an Emeralds game. (Or more correctly, the game of more experienced/higher ranking duelers.) This protects beginners from a complexity to the game until they are more ready for it.

I will elaborate more on this in a little bit. Have to do some work stuff.

[Goldglo]

Like Jake said, there's a lot to go through. I'm only going to pick out one thing since my time at the moment is short.

First, thank you for the time and thought you've put in, Velhelmi-player; I'm glad you did so!

Let's look at IFL - the Iron Fists League (for those of you not familiar with it, think TDL with DoF instead of DoS)
2006 season here: http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2006/
2007 season here: http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/

Anyway, during IFL, at least during the 2007 season, ADVs carried over until the next "hit" took place. Example:
Round V: Dodge/Jab (+-0)
Round X: Leap/Duck (+-0)
Round Y: JK/JK (+-0)
Round Z: Sweep/Jab (0-1)

Now, in a very brief perusal of the IFL records, there were 0 duels in 2006 where the ADV carryover took place and I suspect this was because the rule wasn't in place for the 2006 season.

For the 2007 season, there were a total of 200 duels, including playoffs.

Of those 200 duels 20 (10%) had the advantage-carryover. The longest carryover was 3 total rounds (the initial round where the ADV was gained and two subsequent rounds).

At the time, I was against adopting the ADV carryover rule into regular DoF. Now, however, I beleive I'd consider it. I'm interested to hear, especially from those who had experience with the carryover in IFL, your thoughts on it and how it affected competitiveness.

For disclosure, the matches with carryovers were:

http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=60 (2 duels)
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=64
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=61
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=66 (2 duels)
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=70
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=78
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=76
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=85 (2 duels)
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=83
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=90
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=98
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=96
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... ?match=105
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... ?match=106
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... ?match=121 (2 duels)
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... ?match=122

--Matt

[Velhelmi Torvald]

Like Jake said, there's a lot to go through. I'm only going to pick out one thing since my time at the moment is short.

First, thank you for the time and thought you've put in, Velhelmi-player; I'm glad you did so!

Let's look at IFL - the Iron Fists League (for those of you not familiar with it, think TDL with DoF instead of DoS)
2006 season here: http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2006/
2007 season here: http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/

Awesome. I will look at those what is for you all tomorrow evening. I already have a lot to comment to you three who've responded, but I think it's time to let other people talk and share their thoughts and ideas. I hope there's a lot to read when I get back!

(I missed dueling last night to finish writing that, damnit! )

Jake, the Chessmaster analogy was great. Overall, you're right and there are no issues with what you're saying. It's possible I wasn't clear or maybe misleading about this in my post.

[Jake]

Like Jake said, there's a lot to go through. I'm only going to pick out one thing since my time at the moment is short.

First, thank you for the time and thought you've put in, Velhelmi-player; I'm glad you did so!

Let's look at IFL - the Iron Fists League (for those of you not familiar with it, think TDL with DoF instead of DoS)
2006 season here: http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2006/
2007 season here: http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/

Anyway, during IFL, at least during the 2007 season, ADVs carried over until the next "hit" took place. Example:
Round V: Dodge/Jab (+-0)
Round X: Leap/Duck (+-0)
Round Y: JK/JK (+-0)
Round Z: Sweep/Jab (0-1)

Now, in a very brief perusal of the IFL records, there were 0 duels in 2006 where the ADV carryover took place and I suspect this was because the rule wasn't in place for the 2006 season.

For the 2007 season, there were a total of 200 duels, including playoffs.

Of those 200 duels 20 (10%) had the advantage-carryover. The longest carryover was 3 total rounds (the initial round where the ADV was gained and two subsequent rounds).

At the time, I was against adopting the ADV carryover rule into regular DoF. Now, however, I beleive I'd consider it. I'm interested to hear, especially from those who had experience with the carryover in IFL, your thoughts on it and how it affected competitiveness.

For disclosure, the matches with carryovers were:

http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=60 (2 duels)
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=64
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=61
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=66 (2 duels)
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=70
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=78
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=76
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=85 (2 duels)
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=83
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=90
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=98
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... p?match=96
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... ?match=105
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... ?match=106
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... ?match=121 (2 duels)
http://ifl.duelingzone.org/2007/match_r ... ?match=122

--Matt

Short addendum to Matt's comments.

As he said, this has been considered before, and yes, I believe it was only for the 2007 IFL season.

This is a substantial change that we'll want to discuss with depth, so it's not something that would get implemented *right away* partly because I am not sure if we can get this kind of adjustment made to the calling assistant tool.

In any event, it's a good idea to review and discuss.

[G]

I'm gonna deviate a little bit here.

If the most common complaint is “Why do you use mods against new people?”

It's not the most common complaint.

[Kalamere]

I’ve made the argument in a couple different places that new comers should be treated a little more gently. I don’t think that should be done in a way that makes the climb to top rank (Emerald in this case) any easier though, nor in a manner that tampers with the matrix or overly much with the fancy systems (though the carried advantage system is intriguing and worth further discussion I think).

I think that your analysis of duels is flawed. I say this because there is no reason to believe that, when reversing the ranks of 2 duelists, the moves they selected would have been the same sans fancy. I’d be willing to bet that the selected moves wouldn’t be anywhere near the same, so it makes for a fallacious argument. That said, I did like your analysis of the moves and matrix as a general matter and the relative strength at rank. It demonstrates the kind of in-depth understanding someone should come to as they begin the ascension to top rank.

I think the problem we’re having is one of perceived fairness. That it should be more of a fair fight when a glass and an emerald get in the ring. Why? Certainly we would expect a novice fighting a black belt (and adhering to the rules) to lose 99 out of 100 times. Why does that go out the window here?

The fancy is a game mechanic. It’s a way to introduce a little bit of reality into a pretty random game. We all know that a novice shouldn’t be able to beat an expert. The game mechanic aspect of the fancy gives the “expert” a means of protecting that advantage. If I want to get in the ring with an expert I’d best: (a) know he’s in “training” mode and going to take it easy on me. (b) request that he take it easy on me, or (c) make sure my health insurance is up to date and arrange someone to pick me up from the hospital. In game play terms, I think a glass vs. emerald should very well have those same expectations. They *should* lose the vast majority of the time.

The best way for a glass to avoid that and get a fight on even ground?

Stop being a glass. Fight at your level and get to 2 wins so you have mods of your own to use.

I understand you’re more or less arguing against that type of rank segregation and I think several others have argued there aren’t enough glass level duelists around to make this viable, but looking over the duels fought so far this cycle I would have to disagree. On a weekly basis for weeks 1 -7, glass duelists make up the majority of those who have dueled except for weeks 1 and 5. 53% across the 7 weeks though. Add in Jades and it comes to 62%. Emeralds make up a total of 32% of the duelists across the 7 weeks.

The point of those numbers is to say that: Emeralds *can* be avoided – they make up 1/3rd of the people dueling.
[* note: numbers are looking at unique duelists per week]

Take a look at your own record through 7 weeks, broken down by the rank of who you fought:
Vs Emeralds = 4-9
Vs Sapphires = 0-2
Vs Ruby = 1-0
Vs Jade = 1-4
Vs Glass = 11-4-1

If you avoid Sapphires and Emeralds, which I think any glass should, you’d be a Ruby based on that.

I’d also add that winning 30% of the time against Emeralds is plenty. I’d not want to see it any higher than that, but maybe that’s just me.

All in all, I’d love to see something to make the newcomer period less frustrating. I don’t agree that should take the form of making it easier to face off against an emerald, I think the consequences should be a little less dire is all.

[Rekah Illyriana]

I'd like to make the rank of pancake.

[Jake]

I'd like to make the rank of pancake.

We can probably help with that.

[MurOllavan]

Some thoughts.

The imbalance here is simple: If a Glass misses with Flip, Jab is a safe move. You win every exchange with offense, trade with Jab/Chop and only give up a non-point to defense you can defend away. So long as the score isn't something like, 4-3 and you fear the trade to end the match, there's little downside to this decision.

Trading while down at all is never good, so being down 2-1 or 3-2 and trading for an Emerald is not a good result. Its an important decision point, but I wouldn't jab mindlessly after a failed glass flip.

Likewise, how does a Glass go about attacking a Fancied defense if a Leg Sweep in missed? Once sweep is used, the likeliest move from Emerald will be defensive. Your options as a glass is to either defend to negate a mod or try for a Hook or Spin Kick, neither of which land against all three and lose to all the major offensive moves. Either way, this is bad news for the Glass and a low percentage scoring round.

Its bad news but not that bad. This sounds like the strategy of an Emerald against what they think is a new player. If Sweep misses, sure FDO is a good move along with FDU. But so are Jab/Sweep still for the Emerald.

It just means the glass should mix in a healthy amount of Chop/Snapkick/Spinkick. While they are at a disadvantage, so are Emeralds that miss a LS versus another Emerald. An Emerald that chooses FDO/FDU/FAB 9/10 times against glass-failed-sweep is exploitable.

Of the three main weapons of the Glass, Jab loses to all, Sweep defeats all, Flip beats one, loses to the other two. What's a Glass to do if they miss their Leg Sweep?

Its opponent dependent.

What can you say? Aside from Sweep, the only offensive alternative that defeats more than one of these is Spin Kick

I'd encourage you to think about the other matrix results - they're not irrelevant. Chop does more than beat a FDU, it beats Duck/Leap/Snapkick and importantly - ties with Chop/Jab.

Fancy Dodge
When is it not a good time to use this move against a Glass?

Its powerful, but in the same way FLP'ing every single time after a LC is powerful.

The natural disaster to Fancy Dodge is something like Feint Jab.
This turns the game on its head and changes it into something different and is probably the appeal of the sport. The Glass rank does not have this tool and so by simply using the defensive moves many times over against an opponent whose best and most reliable scoring methods are offensive moves and the seesaw tilt becomes apparent.

Feint jab sucks imo, but yes feints change the game. Glass ranks don't have them, and this puts them at a disadvantage. I don't think its that huge a disadvantage.

Often times being right leaves one uncompensated. An ADV is only good if you can convert it, a feat which is easily thwarted by the opponent choosing to use a defense themselves.

No. No. You are underestimating they psychological effect of 'losing' a round and the decision points created by the ADV.

Sample Duel 2: REVERSED Emerald vs Glass

01. Fancy Dodge – Dodge 0-0
02. Jab – Snap Kick 1-0
03. Leg Sweep – Leg Sweep 2-1
04. Fancy Dodge – Duck 2-1
05. Jab – Jab 3-2
06. Jump Kick – Dodge 3-2+
07. Leg Sweep – Leg Sweep 4-3
08. Chop – Dodge 4-3+

Oh, the duel isn’t over yet. Weird, huh? I’m winning without landing a Fancy. What do you think my next move should me? Fancy Dodge works well for me here, don’t you think? Unless opponent Sweeps, I either win or am up 4-3 and negate that ADV.

No FDO sucks there, you are focusing on fancies too much. You should Jab/Sweep based on a coin flip. 50% win rate immediately and if you randomize the next round properly if hit its 75% chance to win. Plus you get to laugh when foe sweeps losing to both sides of the coin trying to hit people that FDO.

One may not be able to come to any conclusive evidence as things like duelist skill would not be accounted for and simply shifting fanices from one side to the other does not mean that the duelists would fight the same duel under the same circumstances.

Bingo. The move lists would be different.

Feints:
This is not much of an issue overall.

Its opponent dependent. Feints are just as strong as fancies as they are simply reversed. FeFlip is essentially the same as FDO after a LS.

I’ve played DoM a few times and practiced many more and I have to say that I rather liked it this time around. None of the moves felt overpowered and I liked the Focus system. It’s a neat little twist to have a 1.5 move or a 1-.5 trade. If there’s a criticism, maybe it’s that it’s too balanced and many moves feel perfectly viable at the same time rather than a couple. But if your biggest fault is a nitpick then you’re doing a good job.

Thanks. I'm sure Neo would appreciate hearing that as we put a lot of effort into getting it to that point. And each game is different, DoM has a different matrix than the other two. Very different.

DoF, in contrast is the most challenging.
If this statement is correct, and there is no desire for alterations, should it not be labeled as such as a potential warning to incoming players?

I find it to be easier than swords. I think it depends on the player's preference. I would expect someone coming from DoS to find the game less random than swords and they would need to adjust. I would expect someone coming from DoM to find it too random and they would have to get used to that.

Let me answer that question with another question… If the problem not enough bodies, how is this fixed? If there are not enough bodies and the higher ranks beat up the lower ranks, then why not bring in more balance in an attempt to fix both?

There was a time when I considered DoM broke and I figured apprentices could win about 15% of the time versus a mage paying attention. I would say both swords and fists are roughly 60/40 which is probably close to what DoM is now....my question would be what is wrong with that? (Assuming you think those numbers are roughly correct). In other words I'm pointing out that if you make it 50/50 the entire ranking system might as well go away.

Suggestions:

The only one I think is really doable is the ADV rollover option. I'm not sure how much that would accomplish though. I think there are already a bunch of things like PC,mentors such that there's a decent amount of help. In magic we still give out free wins and other tourney goodies, but if the changes indeed made the game balanced we were actually looking to phase that out. Of course once they're common, good luck with that.

I eagerly await your responses.

Thanks for putting in so much time and effort. I'm happy that the enthusiasm exists. Fists is actually my favorite game from a gaming standpoint (RP-wise its the Isle obv).

On a serious note, your analysis left out Fancy Legblock. After your opponent legsweeps its pretty much always a win. I shared this secret with my Hydra mates and now its yours.

[Seirichi]

I'd like to ask a better example of the carry-over idea. Does the ADV follow after a feint? Or is it continued simply from a failed defense-null?

I practice dueled Harris using the idea of a carried over advance and in the end the Glass beat Emerald both times.. but not because of the carry over at all. It was simply because we were able to juke around with trickery and sneak in quick jabs or sweeps instead of continued use of the carry-over ADV because it put the other player on tilt thinking they might defend again ( which already happens with the current ADV system ).

The downside to this? It had the Emerald shotgunning fancies ( I used all six ), which is something lower ranks seem to be complaining about the most. I was shooting out feints to combat Harris' use of ADV carry-over and caught him 90% of the time. The fight of him being glass and me being emerald ended 5-4 him, but he never once stringed a defense, the same with me when I fought at Glass level. The carry over ADV makes you seem more predictable and has no real usage from what I've seen as a point-gainer, but it's more of a way to mindgame your opponent the same way the current ADV system is.

But like I posted first. That's expecting the carry over ADV to be lost after you switch over from defense to attack, or losing a point to a feint.

Results of the two practice duels:

First: Me (Glass) / Harris (Emerald)
Jab / Sweep - 1 Me
Sweep / Fancy Leap - 1-1
Jab / Sweep - 2-1 Me
Duck / Fancy Dodge - 2-1 Me
Jab / Sweep - 2-2
Dodge / Fancy Duck - 2-2
Duck / Fancy Dodge - 2-2
Jab / Dodge - +2-2 ADV Me
Sweep / Spinkick - 3-2 Me ( No more ADV )
Jab / Armblock - +3-2 Me ( ADV )
Leap / Uppercut - 3-3
Jab / Jab - 4-4
Arm Block / Jumpkick - +4-4 ADV Me
Leg Block / Sweep - 5-4 me ( Normal ADV Convert )
13 Rounds, 4 Fancies used / 0 Feints

Second Duel: Me ( Emerald ) / Harris ( Glass )
Feint Jab / Leap - 0-0
Snapkick / Jab - 0-1 Harris
Feint Jab / Dodge - 1-1
Fancy Armblock / Sweep - 1-2 Harris
Flip / Dodge - 1-+2 Harris ( ADV )
Feint Flip / Duck - 2-2 ( Assuming the carry over ADV is lost for a scored point against the player )
Sweep / Jab - 2-3 Harris
Fancy Dodge / Flip - 3-3
Duck / Jab - +3-3 ADV Me
Leap / Jumpkick - 3-4 Harris
Fancy Dodge / Dodge - 3-4 Harris
Duck / Armblock - 3-4 Harris
Dodge / Legsweep - 3-5 Harris

13 Rounds, 3 Fancies used / 3 Feints used

All it did was make the duel go slower with more pressure put on defensive moves, but that may simply be us because Harris and I are used to fighting Glass vs Emerald with normal Anti-Emerald tactics. The ADV Carry Over was completely useless in the end and the wins came from normal conversions or switching back to offensive when the opponent thought they would defend once more.

All and all.. it didn't feel different from the current system at all, if anything it ( personally speaking ) felt like it simply slowed everything down. And I believe using it would make glasses even more predictable and force Emeralds ( along with other ranks ) to use their fancies more.. Which would be counter productive since many arguments come from "WHY ARE HIGHER RANKS USING FANCIES AGAINST ME".