Need a Sudden Death mechanic?

[Digem]

That said, I wouldn't mind some kind of sudden death win condition, although 50 rounds seems a bit premature.

My team right there wins via legal means, without concessions. It typically wins in around 50-75 turns, which is not infinite.

you yourself think a 50 round timer is premature.
so how are you not trying to stall out a fight then?
I have no problems with your team because I have a few teams that easily counter it.
but do not say you aren't trying to stall when you yourself said 50 rounds was premature.
what else are you hoping for then?
be truthful with oneself it will make things easier on you.

Considering I've stated that my finite game plan typically wraps up in about 50-75 turns, it makes sense that I would hope for slightly more than 50 turns before triggering any sudden death mechanics meant to end otherwise infinite battles. What I am hoping for is to execute my game plan, as clearly laid out. Perhaps you should be taking your own advice about being truthful to oneself.

Obviously you do not know what you are talking about.
When in your own description of your fight plan is to only use dots as an offensive attack and to keep healing besides said dots.
That is the definition of stall team you aren't even using any attacks of your pets, heck your plan only uses crawdad for its big overpowered heal.
Which if they nerf attacks they should nerf heals by the way.
Also you plan on this to be a 50 to 75 round fight which you are dragging or stalling it to be so.
So yes not technically illegal but pet battles were ment to be quick fun fights.
You found a way to drag it out knowing most would quit than fight as long specially if up against you multiple times in row which happens a lot in pet battles.

I don't care if you run with that team and I have one close to that I sometimes use but at least I can admit what I am doing or goal with that team is.
You do not have any great game plan you stall plain and simple.
As a famous quote says i think he does protest to much.

[Jabart]

Obviously you do not know what you are talking about.
When in your own description of your fight plan is to only use dots as an offensive attack and to keep healing besides said dots.

DoT, short for damage over time, is still damage.

That is the definition of stall team you aren't even using any attacks of your pets, heck your plan only uses crawdad for its big overpowered heal.

I use the following attacks throughout the battle:

- Curse of Doom
- Haunt
- Sunlight
- Poisoned Branch

And a couple more once I've established control:

- Snap
- Shadow Shock

[Kpb321]

I think the debate really is what is a stall team vs what is a defensive team. By the strictest definition I'd say a stall team is a team totally focused on making the fight take as long as possible with the goal of making the opponent forfeit rather than win an extremely long game. It probably also manifests in how they play by them milking every turn for as long a time as possible. By that definition I don't think Jabart's team is a stall team and I doubt he plays it like one. With that said it could still be a frustrating team to face as it obviously isn't going to be a quick match either way unless you forfeit.

Maybe there is something blizzard can do to make these teams less annoying with out affecting defensive teams. They could adjust their process that adjusts the timer when plays take a long time or maybe they can add a sudden death mechanic based on time rather than rounds so that a defensive time that is playing its strategy isn't as likely to be impacted. After all if you are making your plays in 10 seconds or less you'd have 120+ rounds before you'd hit a 20 minute timer.

[Digem]

Obviously you do not know what you are talking about.
When in your own description of your fight plan is to only use dots as an offensive attack and to keep healing besides said dots.

DoT, short for damage over time, is still damage.

That is the definition of stall team you aren't even using any attacks of your pets, heck your plan only uses crawdad for its big overpowered heal.

I use the following attacks throughout the battle:

- Curse of Doom
- Haunt
- Sunlight
- Poisoned Branch

And a couple more once I've established control:

- Snap
- Shadow Shock

A dot is not direct damage and you know it.
You did not answer about crawdad 's attack instead talked about dot's that other pets are doing so you are using him just for his big heal.

Finally I could careless what you use.
Heck teams like this make one better battler learning to counter it.
But the point is you are choosing to prolong,drag out or another term for it to stall match plain and simple.
If this great synergy you claim pets or moves have why not use say a frog and cleansing rain with team for buffs on aquatic moves which crawdad has or moonlight for heals buff?
Oh wait you want to use double heal that photogenisis has why?
To drag out or stall match that is why

[Mezmaron]

I really don't have a problem with stall teams but if I were to write out a definition of how to play a stall team it would essentially be what you're describing. While you insist your intention isn't to get people to quit to avoid an overlong, drawn out fight, I would think that occurs quite often. That being said, I don't really think there's a need for a sudden death mechanic. You can just quit a match if it's taking too long. You can be right into another pet battle relatively quickly. Most people luckily don't like to play stall teams in my experience. You can get fast wins with plenty of teams without having to resort to doing that.

So if you were going to make a stall team, you would include a completely offensive pet such as Unborn Val'kyr instead of something like Singing Sunflower/Ruby Droplet/Emerald Proto-Whelp?

Do people concede matches? Sometimes, but usually when the writing is on the wall. When I have three pets at over full health, and the opponent's remaining pets are obviously on their way to death, the game is pretty over. This is no different than when I play my Murkalot/Blackfuse Bombling/Gilnean Raven team that wins (or loses) in 6-10 turns, yet still get plenty of concessions by turns 2-4 when the outcome of the game is already obvious. Occasionally, people (usually those I have just beaten in a previous match) will concede upon sight of my team, but again, this happens to all my teams. (For the record, my old team of pre-nerfing Kovok, Val'kyr, and ANY third pet triggered more pre-game concessions than any other team I have ever fielded, by far.)

I disagree with the fact that I am "having to resort" to a "stall team." I enjoy testing and perfecting different strategies, and one of them happens to be based around the incredible synergy between Sunlight and Wish. If I was all about getting wins faster, I have plenty of aggro teams such as the aforementioned Bombling team that easily gets through a whole battle in less than a minute. It takes very little time to rack up a bunch of wins using a team like that. I have no need to use any allegedly dirty tactics for cheap wins; if anything, using my Wish team results in much slower wins for myself due to the nature of the team. So why use my Wish team? Simple. Because it's fun and strategic, which is why I enjoy this game. I still see nothing wrong with that.

I have played stall teams and Valkyr is absolutely a stall pet if you are using her with haunt. If you used her with UA then yeah it wouldn't be very stally but haunt makes it a good stall pet since it completely allows her to avoid damage for multiple rounds. I'm just saying call a stall team for what it is and quit acting like it's not.
If you want your matches to be really long because you enjoy it you have as much right to that as the people who want to rack up wins as fast as possible using whatever legit, non bugged means necessary (doesn't make them dirty or cheap anymore than your team is dirty or cheap). Many people are working towards achievements or leveling their toons through pet battles and thus don't want to spend alot of time fighting a battle they only might win when they could just forfeit and more than likely get into a fight that doesn't involve a stall.

[Hootstwo]

Anyone whose "strategy' is to take 50-75 turns to win in a pet battle is rationalizing their douchey "strategy".

[Quintessence]

Let's remember that even though some teams can be frustrating to face, we still need to be respectful. Everyone is free to choose their preferred way to play and win, and that's the beauty of Pet Battles.

[Digem]

Let's remember that even though some teams can be frustrating to face, we still need to be respectful. Everyone is free to choose their preferred way to play and win, and that's the beauty of Pet Battles.

Agreed, but it was this guy that said he was deeply offended by calling his 50 to 75 round strategy to win a pet battle is not stalling.
I am fine with whatever someone chooses to do but don't act like you have a great
Strategy when all it involves is placing dots and healing and slowly weakening the opponent.
Their is no way he has t had multiple people run from his stall team and that is fine.
Just don't give an attitude that you are master strategist and rest of us dumb calling a spade a spade.
If that is your play style fine but at least admit to it.

[Poofah]

I am fine with whatever someone chooses to do but don't act like you have a great
Strategy when all it involves is placing dots and healing and slowly weakening the opponent.

It's an effective strategy, why shouldn't he play it?

So yes not technically illegal but pet battles were ment to be quick fun fights.

This is your imaginary rule. Nobody else has to follow it. The actual rules support healing strategies.

This sort of argument is as old as games are -- here's a wonderfully articulated example from a 20 year old video game: [url=http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html]http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/intermediates-guide.html[/url]

[Beardydan]

From the Wow site [url]http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/game/pet-battles/[/url] guide, bolding mine:

The pet battle system is a fun and fast turn-based combat game that grants you rewards and opens up daily quests.

[Poofah]

That's a lovely goal to aim for, but the current system doesn't support it. If they want to force us to play fast games, they need to make rules that compel fast games. Otherwise, people will play slow strategies if it's to their advantage. It's not the player's responsibility to enforce the game designers' objectives.

They've stamped out degenerate stalling tactics before, but they've left healing alone. If they don't want people playing Blossoming Ancient/Crawdad, they need to nerf those pets. Either they've gone under the radar (since 5.0 in the case of Sunlight/Crawdad), or else the game designers don't feel that this is a degenerate tactic.

[Digem]

From the Wow site [url]http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/game/pet-battles/[/url] guide, bolding mine:

The pet battle system is a fun and fast turn-based combat game that grants you rewards and opens up daily quests.

OOPS , Poohaf seems you didn't bother read from the wow website about it as I did and thank you Beardydan.

[Dakaf]

Let's get this tread back on topic and not going at each other's throats please!

[Rendigar]

Can someone define "fast" for me such that there is no arguement as to what is meant by it? Because as much as I'd hate to be stuck in a pet battle for 10-15 minutes, that's still far faster than running most 5-man heroics on my lesser geared alts.

It's definitely up to Blizzard to make a decision as to what a reasonable amount of time and/or number of turns is acceptable before any sudden death mechanics kick in. I'm not sure which is better, though, sudden death (which penalizes teams focused too heavily on healing in a 1-sided fashion) or just make the fight end in a draw. After all, many people have proven you CAN beat a healer team with lots of different pets - darkness, high-burst damage, etc. - so it's not unreasonable to allow for healing mechanics the way they are. But people who cannot win in a reasonable amount of time shouldn't be rewarded, either.

What about something like after 25-35 turns the time to respond is cut in half, and at 65-75 turns it's declared a draw? Or reduce the time to put in an action in stages? So at 20 turns it's 3/4, at 40 it's 1/2, at 60 it's 1/4, and at 80 it's a draw? Or drop the response time available by 1 second every 5-10 turns? People who know their pets and their rotations and are legitimately trying to win with a healing team shouldn't be affected by the drop in response time. And the stallers will never get a win, which defeats the purpose in their playing unless it's JUST to be a jerk. Since remote-triggered internet-tazering is not legal anywhere on Earth (that I know of) I don't think Blizzard can give us an option for dealing with THOSE people.

I don't play any healing comps myself, as I'm looking to win or lose quickly and get on with it, but I don't mind running into them. If I see them every couple of games, so be it, I can walk away - my time is more important to me. Like it or not, though, until Blizzard comes out and says "We want all pet battles to end in 7 minutes or no more than 32.5 turns" there is no way to justify sudden death. We can play by the rules, but Blizzard has to define them first - all we have right now is the ability to build a team that takes forever to kill unless you have an appropriate counter (or want to just give them a free win, which is BS). Playing a game within the framework of it's rules is not cheating (but it can sure be annoying!).

[Hootstwo]

I'd like to see a turn or time limit, make it reasonable - 50 turns total maybe? The winner decided by total damage done aggregate over the fight. If you're genuinely trying to win and not just run out the clock, your damage numbers should be good.

[JEC]

Can someone define "fast" for me such that there is no arguement as to what is meant by it? Because as much as I'd hate to be stuck in a pet battle for 10-15 minutes, that's still far faster than running most 5-man heroics on my lesser geared alts.

I think that the "fun and fast" quote is little more than a marketing blurb and nothing in particular is meant by it. Pet battles are fast and fun! Tasty and less filling!

The bottom line is that if blizzard has designed pets with certain abilities, then using those abilities is not "cheating". I agree that some combinations are annoying, and maybe a mechanism that limits the number of turns could help. But I don't feel like I am "rewarding" someone for bad behavior by forfeiting a match when they use a stall team, I just feel like I'm saving myself some time and annoyance.

There are so many combinations of pets possible that I doubt that anyone could have foreseen that some battles would end up dragging on. And I think that the popularity of pet battles may have caught blizzard by surprise as well, so there is a certain amount of making it up as they go along. I'm not sure that I think that anything really needs to be done as long as anyone can bow out of a battle when they feel like its an exercise in futility.

[Digem]

Can someone define "fast" for me such that there is no arguement as to what is meant by it? Because as much as I'd hate to be stuck in a pet battle for 10-15 minutes, that's still far faster than running most 5-man heroics on my lesser geared alts.

I think that the "fun and fast" quote is little more than a marketing blurb and nothing in particular is meant by it. Pet battles are fast and fun! Tasty and less filling!

The bottom line is that if blizzard has designed pets with certain abilities, then using those abilities is not "cheating". I agree that some combinations are annoying, and maybe a mechanism that limits the number of turns could help. But I don't feel like I am "rewarding" someone for bad behavior by forfeiting a match when they use a stall team, I just feel like I'm saving myself some time and annoyance.

There are so many combinations of pets possible that I doubt that anyone could have foreseen that some battles would end up dragging on. And I think that the popularity of pet battles may have caught blizzard by surprise as well, so there is a certain amount of making it up as they go along. I'm not sure that I think that anything really needs to be done as long as anyone can bow out of a battle when they feel like its an exercise in futility.

easiest thing they could do is after say 50 rounds maybe less have damage start doubling and healing start doing less.
would make it quicker but still give those that like it some time to set up a strategy(which by the way I don't mind just didn't like someone saying they aren't stalling or slow playing when they are).

[JEC]

(which by the way I don't mind just didn't like someone saying they aren't stalling or slow playing when they are).

Well, I suspect that they don't like the implication that they are somehow playing outside of the rules, so I think you're probably even.

[Abashera]

1) So I hear one person saying that teams that heal but have low offense are annoying.

2) Someone else said that it's more annoying when someone takes too long to make a move.

Why not counter #1 with #2 and annoy in return?

TWO GREAT TASTES THAT TASTE GREAT TOGETHER!!!

Personally I have a lot of patience and can out wait most people trying to wear down my patience. But if I really need to be somewhere, as someone said, there's always retreat...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yZ-oMOSrnA

[Aerozia]

the whole issue with stall teams, or healing-intensive teams, is the people that play against them get a bad case of the butt-hurtery. meaning they hate the idea that they are giving a win to a team that stalls, or heals, drawing out the match.

I say, pull up your big girl panties and either leave or finish the fight. If you're GOOD you can beat them, use strategy. people just like to load up on the OP pets and blast through quick games. I enjoy games that actually make you think, like chess. If I was playing a healing team, try and stun or switch, or whatever their pets at a pivitol moment to screw their plan up.