Ban of Conditioning

Lönkka wrote:

I have no problems having cards in VTES that end games on time.
Conditioning, as well as Deflection and Govern do just that.

elotar wrote:

Ashur wrote:

My main argument for not banning Conditioning: It ends games.

I don't think this argument is valid any more - after banning of Anthelious I see no timing problems outside of overly long discussions.

elotar wrote:

I don't think this argument is valid any more - after banning of Anthelious I see no timing problems outside of overly long discussions.

[/quote]

I think timeouts are still rathr big an issue.

How many tables(/games) were played in the EC?
How many of those timeouted?

Lönkka wrote:

elotar wrote:

I don't think this argument is valid any more - after banning of Anthelious I see no timing problems outside of overly long discussions.

I think timeouts are still rathr big an issue.

How many tables(/games) were played in the EC?
How many of those timeouted?[/quote]

As I understand:
7/24(-?) Legendary
8/54 day 1
11/24 day 2

Yea, there was some timeouts day 2, but I'm pretty sure that it's not because the lack of bleed modifiers

I personally got one table near time limiit, but just because of 5 guys with votes, one guy activly stalling and generally some stupid things happening like unjustified cros-table rushes.

elotar wrote:

As I understand:
7/24(-?) Legendary
8/54 day 1
11/24 day 2

Not that bad.
Especially Day 1 seems to have worked quite well.

If you want less time outs, then remove the incentive to stay in a game. Remove the 0.5 vp reward for staying alive, and it will in the long run result in less time outs. The reduction from 1vp to 0.5 vp was an improvement. But this should be a diffrent topic.

Sure, conditioning is a bigger looming threat then other modifiers, but I disagree that this "game ender" is vital. Oh I am against the ban, but please continue such discussions. I am very intressted in the way you think about these things.

gr,
Jeroen