Discussion: Rune Limit 1 on non-Champions

I think it would limit game design. I like the idea of some decks being based around specific non-champion runes.
If this rune limit doesn't affect every non-champion rune, (or even the majority) then i'm all for it.

 

Would love to see an increase in diversity outside of champion units however i think this would force the competitive side of poxnora back into the good stuff meta decks for champions since this would hurt themes quite a lot.

 

no thanks

 

A deck-limit of one on some powerfull runes could be good... but as a general rule it will be bad.

 

I don't think it would make much of a difference on meta, and very negatively hurt themes. It could be said that on average that the power of meta decks will all go down about the same, and themes will be hurt even more. In essence meta decks, reduced by a standard, would stay the same while themes that often use doubles would be hurt beyond the standard overall drop in power level.

I myself find it hard finding space to fit all the non-champion runes I want, for example I don't run erode or emergency kit or horn of order etc. as I would like to in a lot of my 'meta' BGs. Forcing me to run 1 of each non-champion rune would just make deck building 'easier' from my standpoint, and I feel a lot of factions would have the same sort of feel for meta at least. For example, I know a lot of FS players have troubles cramming 2 marsh songs and also potentially a noraweave in to their BG, and this is a really tough deck building problem they either have to overcome or work around. Making a 1 non-champion deck limit really makes this decision 'easy', just run 1.

Themes on the other would be hurt a lot more. Currently in my mirefolk and psychic decks I run 4/3 doubles(3/2 without marsh song) respectively with all of those doubles being theme runes. This is compared to meta where I run 2 doubles (2 marsh song 2 PHS), and losing marsh song is not really a big deal for an already hyper efficient BG (nora infuse would be a suitable replacement IMO) and likewise with the second PHS (probably run horn of order instead to replace the power turn). I feel in no way that these BGs (themed) are crammed for space (just as an fyi) as my meta BGs are, and so all limiting deck space would do is make these BGs far less efficient (since those deck 2/3 deck spots wouldn't be filled with meaningful synergies), while having an overall neutral effect on meta BGs as they all drop at a standard efficiency/they were already crammed..

 

The runes being vented at (drown and FR) were ones that would almost never be x2 anyway.

 

Ah, ok. I dunno then. I guess I prefer the consistancy of the deck limit 2. Also perhaps it is easier to learn pox when you can double up on your favourite spell.

Which makes me wonder if banners shouldn't be nerfed and be deck limit 2. Then it would just be heroes that are the exception.

 

I'd be interested to see a 'no limits' page for non ranked matches, where anything goes in terms of rune number, just to see the creativity come out.

Maybe circus or maybe still faction limited.

Just for fun.

 

I do not like the idea. While it would most likely not affect the usual meta decks as there is a great variety in spells that do the same, it would hinder some more focused trategies.
For example echoes need to be run as 2x or not at all 1x doesn't really work.

 

I feel like deck limits is something not used enough in design. A rune having a limit of 1 or 3 etc can completely change it

That said, I dont think a blanket limit is correct

 

How about instead of limiting the use of good stuff, make useless stuff better?

 

I personally don't like the idea, since it does limit deck variety. It would probably be a more effective across the board change if it were for champions, but even then I think it would be a little weak. I don't like the idea. I'd rather wait for midterms with no interruptions.

P.S.

The proposed across the board warbanner ban would have really hurt some factions more than others. I can't imagine playing skeletons with 5 less hp, would be brutal i many cases, not to mention bone mine was on the chopping block as well.

 

What decks would actually be affected by the 1x rule? I think that, more often than not, this would actually force people to build better decks, rather than restricting their building ability (as in, running singleton suites of non-champ runes is a really good idea and not enough people do it).

 

I enjoy Highlander because 30x1 is more fun than 15x2. However I think most themes that depend on certain non-champs would be crushed.

I agree with the sentiment that 1 per bg rule could be applied to some more powerful, non-thematic runes for a good effect. Mindslicer Obelisk is limited to 1 and it makes sense to me why that is. Could do that for more runes.

 

Which ones are these, though? Any particular themes come to mind? This point has been brought up in the abstract several times, but it's worthless without at least some examples.

 

Stitched, Imps, Fire, Deep Elves, Salaman. That's just from themes I play.

 

I never realised it was x1, probably because it would never occur to me to x2 it.

So, unless I'm missing something, that seems an exception for no good reason.

 

I would personally like to see x1 the standard for everything outside of themes. Each theme in turn would have a specific list of runes that could be played and you could play them x2, 3, ect... depending on theme. This would require a specific list of runes for each theme to be made but it would make this game MUCH simpler for new players to understand since they could just select a theme and see what runes are needed to play it. Then once a player understood the game, they could try their hand at highlander and make their own meta decks.

Right now with 6 billion runes to choose from, even making a theme deck is daunting.

Too bad this would require a lot of overhead to implement. Plus since this my idea and I am a nobody, I am sure everyone will hate it.