Duelyst Forums

DeathsAdvocate's Potential Community Run Ban List


Because Discord is an awful place for organized/recorded discussion, data gathering, and I can not stand it…Discord has to much…well discord.

Its great for friendly chats, and small private groups, but awful for something like this.

And yes realistically many may not go for it. But you gotta start somewhere. And again it is very realistic for the tournament scene.

(I did post it on the Duelyst Central discord, but no one seemed interested, and due to it being discord, it’s already buried by unrelated disscussion.)


Is it possible to ask RHacker or one of the mods at DO (lyvern, ryv, ash) to make a separate channel in their discords and ask people to post in that channel three cards they wish to see on the banlist?

If that is possible, then the only hard part once you get a sufficient amount of votes is to announce the existence of the banlist and convince people to follow it.


That would certainly make Discord a more viable venue for this endeavor.

(I think we need more then three to prevent one deck from over taking the others. Probably something like the top 25% of the list, ideally somewhere between 4-15.)


Yeah, that sounds like a good idea. You can let people vote for however many cards they want as long as they are specific cards and then you can choose whether to ban the top 5 or top 15 cards.


I’d say that would be an unreasonable action. Pretty sure any “obligatory” ban list would be shot down in about 10 seconds

For sure. At first at least.

I’m not sure what it might be (Are aliens involved? ;))

Seriously, I’m a relatively new player and I haven’t even squeezed all the fun out of a single General in a single Faction yet, but it is easy to see how veteran players might be bored by an unchanging meta and want to spice things up. You see this in the way at a certain point meme decks begin to proliferate on ladder.

Some top players are happy to play decks the community loves to hate while demonstrating their mastery of the game and rising to the top of the ladder (see Kolos). Others don’t mind messing around in Gold and Diamond with silly fun decks all month (eg Skarzig). But many experienced players are caught in the dilemma of wanting to play new and interesting decks - while also remaining competitive. Those whose competitive streak wins out end up playing “toxic” decks they dislike and not having much fun, while those for whom novelty is the prime motivation end up playing fun meme decks but suffering because their win rate plummets. DA’s plan hopes to solve this problem.

@deathsadvocate If I were you I would choose a short shortlist of cards; make a Sign-up post; say everyone who signs up gets to vote on the first month’s banned cards and take it from there.

PS (IF most participants are regular S-Rankers, you could also specify that the ban only apply once you have reached S-rank. That way the honour system would be fairer and much easier to verify)


There is a difference between me saying “only reasonable action” and “only reasonable action following a similar spirit”. And yes, it is unreasonable to expect the community to accept an involuntary banlist, I never suggested otherwise.

DA’s plan will not solve this problem because the honor system is a horrible idea in trying to implement a community created meta. Players who want to be silly and have fun are already doing so, just not at a rank visible to most. Players who want to be competitive don’t have to play cancer. The only people who play cancer to be competitive on ladder are those who belong in Gold/low Diamond. Good players, bona fide S rankers do not have to resort to wanderer ragnora to be competitive on ladder. The people who want to be competitive in official tournaments, well, there is the easy solution of having the organizer implement a banlist and check all replays to make sure things are up to snuff.

Just to make something to clear, my assumption, and I’m sure this sentiment is shared by other top players, of this whole banlist idea is not to affect the competitive environment nor to create an environment where meme decks can more easily propagate, it is almost purely under the pretense of FUN.

Sure many people don’t like this meta but that is because they find it unfun, not necessarily because they want to see more abyssian meme decks or less ragnora. And this is a fine difference because the way you are phrasing your argument, you would have me believe that you want to eventually create the ideal meta through this project. That’s not gonna happen as many others here have already told you. If there is any hope of this banlist succeeding and being accepted by a large enough percentage of the community, the purpose of it should be solely to create a new meta so that things can be exciting and fun again.

If either you or DA think you are gonna create an ideal meta, this project WILL reflect such efforts and thus ultimately result in failure.

Assuming from this point on, the purpose of this project is FUN, the need for a honor system is not necessary. Just organize the community to create a banlist and then implement. Whoever wants to participate can do so. If someone in S decides to curb stomp participants with a deck primarily composed of cards in the banlist, then so be it.


This Mod says nay, I’m sorry but I’m not making a channel in discord for something pedantic you can make your own private group for if you so wished. Also as discussed the idea while fun to theorycraft is unenforceable in the client and would imo fall apart in a hot minute.

TLDR- go make a discord ban chat or something, see if that gets traction going and take it from there.



I’m honestly not sure how you got that idea. I really have no dog in this fight, but what I’m imagining is a small number of veteran players agreeing to limit a handful of cards every month while playing amongst themselves to enhance their enjoyment of the game:



Standardized Tournament ban list is goal number one, as that is the most important aspect. It will already have a small effect on the ladder meta as people will want to test for it.

Goal number two is if we can actually put together the tournament ban list then we can talk about trying to do the opt in Top 50 project.

Goal three is that it simply takes off and grows on its own.

Also I do not think a private discord channel would really be useful. The public eye of the forums is best. Discord just seems like a more difficult place to try and discuss things while splitting the focus between places. I would rather have a one stop shop so everyone can come and see the feedback.

I will only worry about a discord group if/when I can actually put together a committee, although having an official one on the big channels would be nice.

Ideal may be a stretch, but it can certainly refresh things and hopefully improve them.

Competitive = Fun for many folks, my self included. If the competitive meta is unfun and or stale, the game is unfun.

I do not think these two factors can really just be separated like you are suggesting. Nor do I want to separate them.


I mean tbf the vast majority of the top 20 was memes anyway. Just saying.


That’s my mistake for misinterpreting your stance, I’m sorry. I don’t think we agree on how this should be excuted though it seems we are of similar mind in what the ultimate goal should be. I also don’t agree with this project though it would be nice to have a brand new meta.

I think the best that can be done is like DA said, tournament sanctioned banlist and that would be difficult as well.


Robust debate :wink:

It’s all good.


A ban list for the ladder will be less
…“You will be punished for using these cards.”
and more
…“Challenge of the month! Can you make it to S-rank without these cards?”


Banlist voting!!!

  • Vaath the Immortal
  • Starhorn the Seeker
  • Ragnora the Relentless

0 voters


There has been a lot of discussion, but if you really feel strongly you should just go for it.

Collecting the top 50 decks or doing Power Rankings is/was not some kind of divine happening. Individuals just went ahead and took the initiative to do it. I see no reason why the people interested in this could not make it happen.


I am trying to make it happen, but for it to work I need to put together a committee, ideally out of folks like you, top 50, tournament organizers, and the rest of the Duelyst Central crowd.

As reception among that crowd has been low, progress has been slow. I am currently trying to figure out how to recreate the power ranking spreadsheet for this as my next step. Once I get that done/get help with it then I can start inviting people directly.


Personally I really don’t see a need to enforce bans outside of tournaments. The balancing of the game is not perfect but it’s fine, most of the lists people complain about are not played that much anymore anyway, people like to play memes these days, and the power of the meta lists are not that big. That’s of course all based on my subjective experience. What would be nice to see though is more tournaments, and with creative rules. And while a ban list for tournaments would be nice as guidelines, let each tournament have their own rules. So instead of spending effort in elaborating this ban list, why not use that energy to make more tournaments happen in the first place?


I am also trying to reinvigorate my motivation, as well as many others, motivation to play. I want to play Duelyst, not a random thing that is drastically different from the normal game. And without at least standardized tournaments we are left with an unfun/stale meta for both ladder and tournament. Meanwhile trying to test/prepare for tournaments or anything with competitive value is not feasible without standardization.


I’ve purposely stayed very quiet while this was a hot topic. I can tell you that I have been readying through most of this content and discussions elsewhere and am spending a lot of time pondering a possible ban list for the next MDL cycle and will announce my thoughts on that before the next MDL begins.


Ok. Well I hope you will consider forming a committee. Banlists done by a group are almost always better then an individual.

Chances you could send me an editable version of the power ranking spreadsheet in the mean time? So I can see what I can do on my own with adapting it to the principal.