surge vs fight

hey,

So the thing is a surger who gains 210 lp in a week contributes 8400 pts where a fighter only contributes 4200. I think for the sake of having everyone atleast trying to surge we should cut members who always surge some slack. I mean 210 lp will always be the goal but when someone who surges all the time ends 20 -30 lp lower always then i think we should not make to big a deal out of it because 180*40 > 210 * 20.
What do you guys think?



greetz kani.

I agree with this.
We need to find the correct % down. First thought was 20% but i've not yet done the math.
So feel free to run it down for us.

I think it's a good idea, but I think it's more important that we emphasize net points over anything. The only thing that matters is the difference between how much your deck scored vs. how much the opponent scored on your deck.

I'm looking at some of these wars, and people are surging but losing a ton of battles. I'd rather see them fight and get a higher net score, even if the battle is less glamorous.

That's another thing--HOT's scores are always really high, because they always surge. Have you ever noticed that their opponent's score is really high as well? That's because HOT gives them a lot of points when their surges screw up. Take a look at our past wars and you'll see what I mean: some of them went like 700 points won, 500 lost, in 40 battles fought. That is a complete waste: to only get 200 net points in 40 fights is no better than they would have done if they had just won 8 battles on "fight."

Our concern shouldn't be high scores, it should be victory...and we need to focus on net points in order to do that.

Perhaps we should make it a requirement that members surge after 2000 lp? Or at least make an attempt? Because once that happened, I wasn't interested in lp anymore anyway, lol...and the challenge of surging made the game way more fun.

sorry if this sounds like rambling, really tired here...

Interesting.

I think we need more discussion about this topic.
I want the opinion on these matters from all officers.

The way to tell whether you should surge or fight is pretty simple: if you can win 3 fights for every 2 losses, and you surrender those losses, it is the same as if you win 5 fights (on average). This is assuming 40 points per surge, and 20 points per fight.

How about if we instead have a net point requirement for members? If we have an lp requirement of 30 per day right now, that would mean that they would win about 600 points for us on "fight," and 1200 on "surge." So, if we have a net point requirement of, say, 500/day (3500/week), and tally it and the end of the week, that would ensure that we are getting quality members who aren't just active. It would also ensure that members are using good defense decks, because those defensive losses will count against them.

This would be hard to keep track of, so it would be best for the officers to keep track of lp--if someone isn't getting 210 lp/week, then we can look closer at their performance and calculate their net points. You could get 500 net points in as little as 12 surges, so once we double check that should give us a better idea of how they're doing.