Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, elit eget consectetuer adipiscing aenean dolor

New PVP mode suggestion: Weekly Bans

Hmmmm… All the talk about PVP variety has kept me thinking while i was also checking my MTG collection to see what are in the current meta and what was banned/unbanned recently. After a while i came up with an idea that maybe could be implemented on GoW: Weekly tournament bans.

What do you mean?

  • Each week we could have something “removed” from the game, be it troops or kingdoms. It would affect the tournament only and only for the duration of one week. It brings more variety of teams for a whole week as people will have to try out new combinations.

I’ve spent a lot to make my team and now you want me to not use it? Are you INSANE?

  • For the duration of the event you would “lose” some key elements of your team, yes. But on the other hand what made this team so good? We can’t be blind to the fact that some troops and mechanics are way better than others, and to avoid more nerf calls this rotation also helps as there is a time where others will be “free” of certain teams like Goblins, Maw/Mercy, Valk/Mab…

I don’t own half the troops present in the game, how would i be able to play if some are banned?

  • I understand that this limitation would impact the newish players who usually don’t have a lot of troops, but if anything this kind of event could be a new pvp mode to be introduced. Pretty much as we have now the Ranked and Casual, so it wouldn’t be mandatory to play only on this mode.

What would we gain by playing in this new event?

  • Aside from the new experince/challenge of using some troops that are currently “abandoned” and having more diversity of teams to fight i think there could be more rewards in the same format of the weekly troop’s events where we would gain extra resources for using the newly released troop. Of course the extension of the rewards would be something to be decided by the developers, if they think this mode could have Tier and Leaderboard rewards that’s something they need to discuss. Personally i would be happy with something more in the lines of the Revenge bar, after some battles you get something. No defensive count/losses for people who despises the notion that the A.I is messing around and that’s all, i guess.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Subtle snarky comments? I accept it all, and coffee too i must add.


I think the over competitive atmosphere is part of the problem in the first place, so by having a mode with one “problem” team removed, you would just increase the number of the others. Even better if you removed one of their counters. I also don’t know how this could work alongside the current ranked if it also offered a similar reward structure - time constraints would still be the biggest factor of getting a top spot, so if you were going for it, you could only do either/or.

If/when an actual real time head to head PvP mode is added, this would be great for it.

For what we have now, I think a small incentive (on both defend AND invade) for using certain troops. It would be nice if there were a separate team score that actually took into account how powerful the troops are (even if using a formula based on the popularity of each troop and its popularity used with the other troops in the team), so that using an under-used team would give you some additional reward (preferably something tangible, like glory, as using a slower team would mean slower overall gains to begin with).

I actually think the current PvP is fine as is, and what we are actually seeing is some burnout for incentivizing playing between 20-40+ hours in a week for a chance at the relatively meager reward offered. The bottom of the top 100 spots are doing as many battles per week as I have done in the past when trying to farm challenges. I can see how playing against the same or similar teams over and over again, especially if you rarely change your own team, and especially after you have already been going for an hour that day. As someone who plays about 60-120 PvP matches a week and with a variety of different teams (usually doing the ride to Tier 1 with a team using the event troop), having certain defense teams or troops frequently seen is much less irksome.

tl;dr: Reward diversity, not punish conformity


Thanks for the input. The suggestion is hardly at it’s prime, but removing/banning certain elements from the current meta, for this mode only, can promote and reward the players with tangible (depends on what the devs would put as reward) and intangible (variety, fun, experience with new teams) gains. In the past the extra rewards from using the weekly released troop weren’t enough to some players to justify changing their teams.

Every week could have a theme pretty much as we have the weekly Tavern Brawl in Hearthstone, but taking into account that this game doesn’t seem very flexible it would be harder or even impossible to code correctly some new elements.

I think @Mithran made most of the points that I would have made.

Basically, I don’t think they should add weekly bans. People work hard to obtain, ascend and level their troops. So, I want to have the freedom to use any troop from that collection. I’d prefer them to incentivize defense troop variety to put a dent in the PVP monotony. Award creativity instead of using heavy handed nerfs/bans.


I wouldn’t want to see this replace the current structure, but I would like to see something like this added on the side. Either something like the card bans, or some goofy effect on the board. I’m all for balancing competitiveness with stupid fun.

1 Like

I agree with @Mithran that rewards for using certain troops might work better than preventing people from using certain troops. While we’ve had similar events in the past they haven’t really been worth changing up one’s team for unless it was a troop that they already have leveled/traited.

One possible way to do this could be a change in PVP points based on using less used troops. Each week the troops are ranked based on their usage in the previous week. Using those in lower ranks will net you higher PVP point gains, while this doesn’t ban the top tier of troops, it does discourage their use. And assuming people took up this idea then it would in theory begin roting the troops, since last week’s underused troops will be this weeks overused, causing a shift in the tiers for the following week.

EDIT: Also I’m not sure if it’s worth setting up a new mode to deal with the issue of meta stagnation in normal PVP.
As a new mode I do like the idea though, but it would need to come after current PVP’s meta issues are fixed. (Either from changes or just people branching out more in their teams)


And my suggestion is not about preventing anyone from using it in the regular pvp or quests/challenges, just another game mode that you can freely choose to ignore or occasionaly join if you are tired of using/facing the same teams in the current meta. It could work like the arena, but using your own collection instead of drafting some troops that may not work well together.

Well, as i said some fun elements maybe aren’t possible to implement in the game, but i have a few ideas that maybe are possible to implement.

1 Like

Well, if it was a completely separate mode, I guess it wouldn’t do any harm since people could opt out.

I think having environment effects determined by where you are fighting could be interesting:
Tundra: At the start of your turn, all troops are frozen
Volcano: At the start of your turn, all troops are burning
Quagmire: At the start of your turn, all troops are poisoned
Corrosive Mists: At the start of your turn, all troops lose 5 armor
Mana Pool: At the start of your turn, all troops are gain 2 mana
Healing Baths: At the start of your turn, all troops heal 2 health


Now that would provide incentive to mix up home kingdoms. Also teams, presumably to take advantage of immunity to the effects of the kingdom.

1 Like

Yup, using Borealis in the frozen tundra, or Webspinner in poison area, using fireproof troops in volcano so only opponent deals with the 3 damage / round.

And since the fight location is determined by defender, as an attacker you need to be ready to overcome those challenges knowing the defender is likely set up to take advantage of it.


I like the sound of this, and I hope that @Nimhain and company will consider it for future releases.

Of course, I would like most of all if revenges took place in my home kingdom again, but we are veering far off course from the original thread topic now. :stuck_out_tongue:

There are a couple of ideas here we might discuss for the future.


Now, this sounds like a cool and fun idea. :smile_cat:

I support extra (above and beyond normal) rewards for using certain troops, but I do not support card bans, ever… it’s the death to me of many prior good games. Gems takes enough time + effort to obtain cards… I do not want them periodically removing them! That’s a beginning to an end for all card access as we know it. MTG and Hearthstone both fell into the trap of - put too many cards out - can no longer balance, so let’s remove the oldest stock and phase in new sets over time… which for me, I hate. It’s also what made me quit playing and supporting those games… elimination of the cards… It’s the destruction of the collector, it kills the “player memory of investment / time to earn those cards”, it destroys the root and heart of what made the game good in the first place. Corporate greed for new set investment takes over… I really don’t want to see that happen here.

The alternative play modes, say new mini-games like arena would be welcomed as “additions” and then, they could explore stuff like that perhaps, but would never want to see it main game… and frankly, I think there are far better ideas for mini games.

I really like the idea of environmentals in play for certain kingdoms, and events specific to that kingdom, bonus rewards and bonus or alternative effects as a result of the event or kingdom fight.

I would like an option to revenge, counter attack, etc with more control over what kingdom was fought in as well.

I think they could explore the ‘location’ based events and elements of that battle significantly, thus encouraging play and encouraging or discouraging the use of certain troops as a result… and that would be a risk reward thing could be explored.

1 Like

The issue with “supporting” the use of “low rank” troops is that the rewards/incentive weren’t enough to justify changing the teams, if the rewards become better it could have an impact on the economy. Banning a card just invalidates it for a short period of time IN THIS MODE ONLY. If you feel like the rewards aren’t good enough to justify changing your team it’s ok, but everyone who wishes to join in the event using “low ranked” troops wouldn’t have to deal with a “meta team”. Hence why my suggestion stands as it is and why i don’t think it’s enough to just incentive people to use weak troops so players can obliterate their teams.

I think there is potential in this idea, it was something that crossed my mind at some point, but i never sketched it. One thing i think that could be added is that the volcanic area would as well increase your red mana generation.

1 Like

I liked what they started to do but has since disappeared: Giving bonuses for the week if you used the weekly troop in your team.

1 Like

I liked this as well. I’m curious why they stopped doing it since I remember them saying that it was successful among lower level players.

My guess is that not that they’ve stopped it, but more than it’s been put on hold till things settle down a bit with post-2.0 chaos. My guess would be that the next event after the Khetar one might be when we start seeing them again. But that is a pure guess.

Also we’ve seen the rise of 2-troop weeks, and I’m not sure how that would affect the idea of bonus for weekly troops.


The events were SUPER successful. We saw some great engagement with them at all levels of play, and especially with players in the early and mid-games. We’re just making some adjustments, so that when they return they’ll be a lot cooler than before.