inherit
The Hipster of Hipster
266
0
1
Jun 6, 2022 17:51:57 GMT 8
91
DebuRaito
Royal Rumble 2018
450
Jan 7, 2012 22:21:48 GMT 8
January 2012
deburaito
|
Post by DebuRaito on Jun 1, 2015 0:33:20 GMT 8
Hi All Raw Dealers! I have created a revised multiplayer format that might be much closer to simulating a real wrestling triple threat / fatal four way match, showing that every man is really for himself in this format. Please give some pointers / feedback / suggestion of how this can be improved and if it's a balance format. If you have any queries, feel free to post them below too. I will do my best to answer everyone of you. Thanks!
Triple Threat / Fatal Four Way Format
- the game will end with only 1 Pinfall and the victory will go to the player who delivers the finishing blow
- whenever a count out scenario occurs, the player that is supposed to be counted out will put a random card from his ringside pile under his arsenal
- immediate count out win condition will not award the victory in this format (e.g. Mania)
- the pre match phase will always be started by the player with the highest superstar value and goes in a clockwise direction depending on the seating position when playing
- whenever a maneuver is targeted at a player, the player sitting on the targeted player's left, following by the player on the targeted player right, may attempt to reverse it by discarding twice the amount of applicable reversals if the targeted player did not reverse the maneuver, the discarded reversals will not do any damage nor will it have any effects that is printed on the card text. ( e.g. John Cena plays Kick against The Rock, The Rock did not reverse it, Kane who is on the Rock's left can discard 2 Elbow to the Face to reverse John Cena's kick for The Rock, John Cena will not take any damage from the Elbow to the Face discarded by Kane )
- actions and ace will be open for all to reverse, priority will be given to the player who is on the left side of the player who played the action/ace. The opportunity to reverse will be pass on in clockwise position if the player with priority did not attempt to reverse the action/ace
|
|
inherit
SG Championship 2014 Finalist
664
0
Aug 7, 2018 23:19:05 GMT 8
76
God of Kane
1,591
Mar 31, 2013 21:41:03 GMT 8
March 2013
ivertan87
|
Post by God of Kane on Jun 1, 2015 10:56:55 GMT 8
If it is multi maneuver, the player sitting on the right may have to discard 4 applicable reversals to reverse. Jaw drop! - difficulty level 5 STARS
Will it end up chionging just one person then lastly see who got more reversals to stop another player from delivering the FINAL blow?
Action when played, do we need to name which player we are targeting first before other players decide if they want to reverse? Since maneuver can be target at, actions can be targeted at too (e.g. shoot action) If so, I would think that it will act like maneuver too, for left and right player reversing rule - rather than free for all in fatal four format.
OR we should consider 2 types of action cards - one that have effect on other player (e.g. break it out, break it down) and another one that have effect on ownself only (e.g. ego boost/roll out of the ring)? And it will take twice the amount of applicable reversals to reverse an action that will only have effect on self only.
The logic I guess is based on if I make the move to the target opponent (approaching/targeting player), it will take that target opponent just the normal applicable reversals to reverse. But for other players, it will be a higher cost to stop/reverse it. And if I am trying to run out of the ring (without targeting any opponent), maybe ROLLING OUT OF THE RING, other players also need higher cost to stop/reverse it - I am assuming they are not near to me at that point of time and since I am not trying to approach nearer to opponent.
Just ten cents worth of comments. Subjective to individuals. =)
|
|
inherit
The Hipster of Hipster
266
0
1
Jun 6, 2022 17:51:57 GMT 8
91
DebuRaito
Royal Rumble 2018
450
Jan 7, 2012 22:21:48 GMT 8
January 2012
deburaito
|
Post by DebuRaito on Jun 1, 2015 11:57:29 GMT 8
In a real triple threat / fatal four way match, it is always common to see superstars capitalizing on opportunities to get the Pinfall. So I see no problem with hammering a single guy. The old elimination multiplayer format also seem to have this "bullying" factor inside. Actions and aces has always been free for all in the original multiplayer format, so I wish to retain that rule. Target will only be announced after the action or ace is deemed as successful. And since it's free for all, there's no need to double the reversals. Regarding the interfering part for the reversals, I had a hard time struggling with twice the amount or just plus one. Is twice really just too difficult? But I would really hope that this format wouldn't have too much unnecessary interference to discourage anyone from playing maneuvers. Haha! Lastly, thank you God of Kane for your input. Might have to test it out to assess if this format is playable.
|
|
inherit
526
0
Oct 27, 2016 3:59:38 GMT 8
33
iFydd
Doing the best at this moment, puts you in the best place for the next moment.
285
Aug 20, 2012 1:41:59 GMT 8
August 2012
shelan
|
Post by iFydd on Jun 1, 2015 12:56:28 GMT 8
If it is multi maneuver, the player sitting on the right may have to discard 4 applicable reversals to reverse. Jaw drop! - difficulty level 5 STARS Maybe, if it's a multi maneuver, we could interrupt by discarding 2 applicable reversals & overturning 3 cards instead of discarding 4 applicable reversals. What do you think?
|
|
inherit
The Hipster of Hipster
266
0
1
Jun 6, 2022 17:51:57 GMT 8
91
DebuRaito
Royal Rumble 2018
450
Jan 7, 2012 22:21:48 GMT 8
January 2012
deburaito
|
Post by DebuRaito on Jun 1, 2015 13:11:25 GMT 8
Overturning isn't always a bad thing for certain decks, I would prefer that there would be no benefits for interfering at all to discourage interfering as much as possible. Let's not forget, the targeted player still have the priority to reverse first before passing on the opportunity to any interference. Having interference is just a new back up system. Nonetheless, thank you iFydd for your input.
|
|
#ff0000
LVL:9000
6
0
1
May 5, 2024 17:08:44 GMT 8
30
BALLS
BALLS TO YOU
2,280
Mar 23, 2011 12:48:48 GMT 8
March 2011
balls
|
Post by BALLS on Jun 1, 2015 14:09:19 GMT 8
Any thoughts on sharing fort when playing cards?
|
|
inherit
The Hipster of Hipster
266
0
1
Jun 6, 2022 17:51:57 GMT 8
91
DebuRaito
Royal Rumble 2018
450
Jan 7, 2012 22:21:48 GMT 8
January 2012
deburaito
|
Post by DebuRaito on Jun 1, 2015 18:05:33 GMT 8
How do you suggest about sharing fortitude? It's difficult to determine an alliance in this format... It would be really turn off if I work hard for my fortitude to get atomic lariat reversed by a power slam. Lol
|
|
inherit
526
0
Oct 27, 2016 3:59:38 GMT 8
33
iFydd
Doing the best at this moment, puts you in the best place for the next moment.
285
Aug 20, 2012 1:41:59 GMT 8
August 2012
shelan
|
Post by iFydd on Jun 2, 2015 3:04:54 GMT 8
Overturning isn't always a bad thing for certain decks, I would prefer that there would be no benefits for interfering at all to discourage interfering as much as possible. Let's not forget, the targeted player still have the priority to reverse first before passing on the opportunity to any interference. Having interference is just a new back up system. Nonetheless, thank you iFydd for your input. In such circumstances, I would encourage another rule as such as, "Stipulation Control", just so that the other 2 or 3 opponents adapt a balanced mindset over the outcome of the game. Ideas to eliminate broken strategies.
|
|
inherit
The Hipster of Hipster
266
0
1
Jun 6, 2022 17:51:57 GMT 8
91
DebuRaito
Royal Rumble 2018
450
Jan 7, 2012 22:21:48 GMT 8
January 2012
deburaito
|
Post by DebuRaito on Jun 2, 2015 6:18:43 GMT 8
I didn't get your point about the conflicts. HiaC prevents recovery and Evening Gown manipulates hand of opponent. Seems like very different issues to me. Anyway, multiplayer format are usually played very spontaneously without pre-planning. So I'm not sure if there's any obvious broken strategies in this format. If anyone finds any, be sure to bring it up with a simple example.
Once again, thanks for the input.
|
|
#ff0000
LVL:9000
6
0
1
May 5, 2024 17:08:44 GMT 8
30
BALLS
BALLS TO YOU
2,280
Mar 23, 2011 12:48:48 GMT 8
March 2011
balls
|
Post by BALLS on Jun 2, 2015 11:36:12 GMT 8
How do you suggest about sharing fortitude? It's difficult to determine an alliance in this format... It would be really turn off if I work hard for my fortitude to get atomic lariat reversed by a power slam. Lol How about you can use the shared fort for reversal which you do not have enough fort to play. The reversal being played deal no damage and is removed from the game (or face down in ring) instead.
|
|
inherit
The Hipster of Hipster
266
0
1
Jun 6, 2022 17:51:57 GMT 8
91
DebuRaito
Royal Rumble 2018
450
Jan 7, 2012 22:21:48 GMT 8
January 2012
deburaito
|
Post by DebuRaito on Jun 2, 2015 15:57:03 GMT 8
That sounds reasonable, after all, it's difficult to get fortitude when being gang up all the time... But will this result in a highly reversive game where it will be really difficult to get any maneuver to be successfully played? Especially against red walling deck...
|
|
inherit
SG Championship 2014 Finalist
664
0
Aug 7, 2018 23:19:05 GMT 8
76
God of Kane
1,591
Mar 31, 2013 21:41:03 GMT 8
March 2013
ivertan87
|
Post by God of Kane on Jun 2, 2015 22:49:15 GMT 8
how about ringside pile applicable reversals/backlash reversals when interfering? I am thinking that it will be fair to use too instead of discarding solely from hand. They formed part of the reversals too (blindsided ego etc. Maybe propose remove them. And also cards like counterproductive ambitions, steel chain shot tb etc when in ring area etc could be consider in but of course similarly paid twice the amount of reversals (cost) in any case when interfering. what do you think vince.
|
|
inherit
The Hipster of Hipster
266
0
1
Jun 6, 2022 17:51:57 GMT 8
91
DebuRaito
Royal Rumble 2018
450
Jan 7, 2012 22:21:48 GMT 8
January 2012
deburaito
|
Post by DebuRaito on Jun 2, 2015 23:11:01 GMT 8
Hmmm... I would prefer as little interference as possible for this format. So far limiting it to hand would be better. Anyway, hand is way less predictable than backlash deck and ringside pile or ace. I really couldn't say for sure which is more balance until we tried a few rounds though.
|
|