Interesting Statistics...

[BigBadHarve]

I was going over the breakdown of teams and matches from this past Saturday, and it seems that there was a perfect balance of Battlesite VS Any Hero decks. Not only in numbers but in results.

6 players running a site, and 6 running Any Heroes.

While the first round of the Swiss favoured the Any Hero teams - 4 of the Any Hero decks took the win in the first round, every other round in the Swiss was perfectly even. Half the Any Hero teams had a win, and half the site teams had a win.

What's more interesting, is that in the elimination round, the ratio was also a perfectly even split. Four battlesite decks made it to the finals, and 4 Any Hero decks. Though the semi finals favoured the sites, as there were 3 sites and only one any hero deck in the semi-finals, the final round matchup was Site VS Any Hero.

Of course, each match wasn't Site VS Any hero, it was mixed up... but I think the overall results are pretty interesting. It's only one set of results, but it would seem to indicate a solid balance between Any Heroes and Battlesites.

Thoughts?

-BBH

[gameplan.exe]

That is interesting!

Here's the thing about Any Heroes - I see them as just another Battlesite. They have strengths and weaknesses, and options, just like any particular Battlesite. I always hear about the lack of their flexibility, but then there's this -

Supposed flexibility-
If we all mocked up a Danger Room Battlesite, there are probably 8 cards we'd all have that'd be the same (give or take a few). If we all mocked up a list of AnyHero cards we'd use, we'd probably all end up with 8 cards that are the same (give or take a few).

Actual flexibility-
And while AnyHeroes don't allow nearly as much flexibility as any Battlesites, using AnyHero cards come with unique advantages (no dup's, can't be attacked via other cards (except Events), etc).

[Nate Grey]

I also find that very interesting!  My first foray into these forums seemed to focus so much more on the benefits of using Battlesites over Any Hero decks. I was bummed out since at the time all I knew was playing Any Hero decks. I've taken the plunge and tried out Battlesites and I must say I've had much better success switching over to Battlesites than Any Heroes. Although I will admit I don't think I've really played Any Hero decks to their fullest potential.

[Nostalgic]

It was nice to see such a diversity of decks.  To the extent, if any, your house rules may have had an impact on that, or the anyhero vs battlesite results I think is a good thing. 

[BigBadHarve]

It was nice to see such a diversity of decks.  To the extent, if any, your house rules may have had an impact on that, or the anyhero vs battlesite results I think is a good thing. 

I think my House rules were a small part of it. The boost for homebases definitely makes any homebase much more competitive, and thus more appealing. But I can't say for sure how many people came with the teams they did because of my house system. I know Matt did for sure, and possibly Breadmaster.

Two things struck me as ironic, though -

1. Larry chose to use the FF Plaza homebase knowing the additional restriction we put on it. But what's more, he wholeheartedly approved of the restriction! Apparently he felt that FF was still too powerful, and that our reduction of the power card defense to 4s and less made perfect sense, and obviously since he used the deck felt that it was still appealing. I thought for sure I'd get arguments about it from anyone wanting to use an FF deck in the tournament! How funny is that?

2. Ted C. made it to the finals using a Cape Citadel deck, and he was NOT running pseudo aspects. He was playing his team straight-up with an official construction. I don't know if that was a deliberate choice, or he simply forgot to add extra cards.

I can't wait for the next one! I'll keep tracking results.

-BBH

[CoS]

I'd like to see the card list for the Cape Citadel deck...

[BigBadHarve]

I'd like to see the card list for the Cape Citadel deck...

I'll email him and see if he's willing to share his secrets.

All I can tell you for sure is that he was running, Crux, Rapture, Landslide and Mercury in reserve.

He was playing Shattered Image with the Entropy Field event for sure, possibly others.

-BBH

[Nostalgic]

2. Ted C. made it to the finals using a Cape Citadel deck, and he was NOT running pseudo aspects. He was playing his team straight-up with an official construction. I don't know if that was a deliberate choice, or he simply forgot to add extra cards.

I can't wait for the next one! I'll keep tracking results.

-BBH

Interesting... if it was done on purpose it seems like leaving money on the table if you ask me.

[Jesse]

I was going over the breakdown of teams and matches from this past Saturday, and it seems that there was a perfect balance of Battlesite VS Any Hero decks. Not only in numbers but in results.

6 players running a site, and 6 running Any Heroes.

While the first round of the Swiss favoured the Any Hero teams - 4 of the Any Hero decks took the win in the first round, every other round in the Swiss was perfectly even. Half the Any Hero teams had a win, and half the site teams had a win.

What's more interesting, is that in the elimination round, the ratio was also a perfectly even split. Four battlesite decks made it to the finals, and 4 Any Hero decks. Though the semi finals favoured the sites, as there were 3 sites and only one any hero deck in the semi-finals, the final round matchup was Site VS Any Hero.

Of course, each match wasn't Site VS Any hero, it was mixed up... but I think the overall results are pretty interesting. It's only one set of results, but it would seem to indicate a solid balance between Any Heroes and Battlesites.

Thoughts?

-BBH

This is pretty cool. I've been wondering if anyone had an idea of the balance between the two. Have you had any additional results since you last posted this?

[BigBadHarve]

This is pretty cool. I've been wondering if anyone had an idea of the balance between the two. Have you had any additional results since you last posted this?

Nothing as in-depth - but in general there have been a few more Any hero teams than Battlesite teams. I think the last tournament was 5 sites to 9 any hero teams. Even despite that, the final round came down to two battlesite decks (both Beyonder decks) and the playoff for 3rd place was between two any hero decks.

Every tournament we've done has been won by a team using a Battlesite.

-BBH

[Jesse]

Every tournament we've done has been won by a team using a Battlesite.

Thats interesting. I wonder if it has to do with the fact that with a battlesite you can virtually 'pick' what goes in your deck and with any heroes what you see is what you get.....that's definitely something to keep in mind.  Thanks.

[Demacus]

I think that is part of the argument.  Also, with battlesites you can take advantage of specials with similar effects, so long as the corner codes are different, like the AO negate and the DO negate, CN special and AH special, ect.  With Any Heroes, if you want an extra negate that your normal team doesn't provide, Bastion's ZZ is all you get.

[Jack]

In the October tournament, the two finalists were both using Beyonder/X-Babies decks, so both of them had counters to DoW when they played against an Any Hero deck.

[Jesse]

In the October tournament, the two finalists were both using Beyonder/X-Babies decks, so both of them had counters to DoW when they played against an Any Hero deck.

Since returning to OP I have been playing only AH decks so I am not as familiar with battelsite decks as I would like to be - what are the counters to DoW that Beyonder/X-Babies offer?

[Jack]

KL specials:


Goblyn Queen has one as well but it needs to be play before DoW during a battle (and it only lasts one battle). KL specials are the only real counter against DoW and must be played from your team -- you can't draw it from a battlesite.