Wishlist for the new studio

Options
2»

Comments

  • shteev
    shteev Posts: 2,031 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Skiglass6 said:
    Targeted support removal. Even if it would double the cost of spell from 3 to 6 or from 4 to 8. And if this is looked down upon, at the very least make all support destruction "destroy support that has been on the board longest (not including token supports)"
    This sounds great, but in practice it would just further open up the already yawning chasm between the AI and player skill.

    Maybe they could put a bit of work into the AI. And not just making it worse, like they did recently.
  • babar3355
    babar3355 Posts: 1,128 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    TheDragonHermit said:
    Thanks for breaking them up then, on drop rates, you mean for rares and mythical right?
    Also I think D3 sets prices and bundles, so I think that needs to go elsewhere.

    Primarily for mythics and masterpeices, but rares could use a boost too. 

    Right now they are roughly 4% rares, .9% mythic, .1% masterpiece or something relatively close.  Perhaps something like 8.5%, 2% .5% would seem more in line with other similar games.

    They could/should also return the "or better" functionality so that instead of ALWAYS getting rares for EVERY event we could have a 10% chance of getting upgraded to a mythic or masterpiece.

  • Sarahschmara
    Sarahschmara Posts: 554 Critical Contributor
    Options
    I'd like to be able to see my graveyard and play true PVP against my coalition-mates and friendly rivals. 
  • Kinesia
    Kinesia Posts: 1,621 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Mana costs and gains need a proper reevaluation.and in doing so an ongoing policy needs to be created to ensure that there aren't "dead" cards. All cards need _some_ scenario where they will be useful.

    In paper magic they eventually realised that things needed to be balanced based on cost not rarity.

    A support that costs 17 mana but only gives 2 back a turn is a complete waste, it breaks the _intent_ of the paper card completely.
    There do need to be changes as cards are ported into the new system but you need to keep the _intent_ of the paper card.


    Shields need to be listed on supports in the text. This is critical information that is missing to the player but shouldn't be.
    Shields also need to be reevaluated on some cards. Captain's Claws is a good example. It shouldn't be quite as flimsy as Hixus given it's extreme cost. If it was half price it might be ok or current price with 2 shields.


    Mana usage and "cost" of cards need adjusting. Some cards and abilities affect casting cost, some give mana, some increase cost and some drain mana. All abilities exist in the engine, but they aren't all used effectively.
    New perspectives and the Monuments should be affecting the cost of cards while they are in play NOT putting mana on them. The intent is that the monuments give you mana for casting while new perspectives should only give you mana for cycling not casting. If I have a monument _and_ new perspectives then a cycling creature might come into play with 6 mana on it, that's not the intent of any of the involved cards.
    People think cycling is broken, but part of that is really the use of the mana system, it's not endemic to cycling itself.
    (Nissa3 needs a full rework in the progress!)



Categories