What is my decks winning rate when the AI is playing those

ipapotihus

I would like to see those, It could be interesting to build a deck good enough to win when playing with it and good enough to have the AI win with it also. 

That way, it give us a opportunity to make the game for other harder and maybe rank higher.

wereotter

Pretty sure this isn't included on purpose.

Don't worry about if people can beat your deck, and just concern yourself if you can beat other people's. This is also why you can't edit event decks when your nodes are empty. They don't want us trolling other players and making the game harder.

Szamsziel

But allowing us to see deck when on timer would be nice.(not editing) 

Gunmix25

wereotter said:

Pretty sure this isn't included on purpose.

Don't worry about if people can beat your deck, and just concern yourself if you can beat other people's. This is also why you can't edit event decks when your nodes are empty. They don't want us trolling other players and making the game harder.

This is spot on.

Speaking from experience when I used to play Mobsters years ago. Your Wins and Losses record became the bar by which each player measured themselves against others. Mobs (Coalitions) would use this as a way to see if you were good enough to join their band and these same people would troll other top players from other mobs to simply destroy their win loss record by throwing them into a scrolling hit list. There were only two ways a person could be tossed onto the list which required a "link.". 1. When being attacked a notice would appear and you can use that "link" to attack back. Mobs would often have their strongest player make some hits then have their weaker members attack to clear the list of notices removing that bigger players "link." 2. Doing something tinykitty like posting on a players wall would provide a permanent link to be continually attacked from and be constantly thrown up on the hitlist which kept that player perpetually in the hospital and required points to heal to even play. Anyways, this system created a toxic environment for players and a extreme sense of elitism and bullying. I don't recommend this concept at all for MTGPQ. I get the appeal about seeing how well the AI plays your build, but there are players who will use and abuse this as a way to create troll builds making the game less fun to play for all.

babar3355

Gunmix25 said:

wereotter said:

Pretty sure this isn't included on purpose.

Don't worry about if people can beat your deck, and just concern yourself if you can beat other people's. This is also why you can't edit event decks when your nodes are empty. They don't want us trolling other players and making the game harder.

This is spot on.

Speaking from experience when I used to play Mobsters years ago. Your Wins and Losses record became the bar by which each player measured themselves against others. Mobs (Coalitions) would use this as a way to see if you were good enough to join their band and these same people would troll other top players from other mobs to simply destroy their win loss record by throwing them into a scrolling hit list. There were only two ways a person could be tossed onto the list which required a "link.". 1. When being attacked a notice would appear and you can use that "link" to attack back. Mobs would often have their strongest player make some hits then have their weaker members attack to clear the list of notices removing that bigger players "link." 2. Doing something tinykitty like posting on a players wall would provide a permanent link to be continually attacked from and be constantly thrown up on the hitlist which kept that player perpetually in the hospital and required points to heal to even play. Anyways, this system created a toxic environment for players and a extreme sense of elitism and bullying. I don't recommend this concept at all for MTGPQ. I get the appeal about seeing how well the AI plays your build, but there are players who will use and abuse this as a way to create troll builds making the game less fun to play for all.

I definitely agree a model like you are describing would be a bad thing.  However, there are a few reasons this wouldn't happen in PQ.

1. it's much more difficult to have the AI pilot our decks in a decent manner.  My white/red Nahiri deck probably takes down people from time, but it also probably takes 6 turns to hard cast Emrakul instead of casting deploy. The AI even stalled our on original Baral loop decks because it couldn't discard.

2. You can't target individual players.  You could just as easily troll your own coalition.

3. Everyone knows creatureless decks would be great troll decks in HoR, but not that many people run them.  They simply don't care enough to make it worth it.  Tie breakers are fixed and frankly the prizes aren't worth playing for.

Skiglass6

I am not a programmer and have no idea how feasible this is, but to help fix the AI, it would be cool if we could prioritize the cards within our decks. Even better if there were "gambits" (ff12) to even expand the play style and order of the cards in the hand. Like don't play kill spell until there is a opp creature on the board. Or, prioritize gem changer but after one is on the board go to the next priority.  This may have been brought up before. 

If this is to in depth for some players and they do not want to prioritize, the AI can just use current system. Although I think they need to change it.  Creature-Support-Spell is really not challenging. We just watch the AI put the recently drawn creature to the top. Most of the time it takes several turns to cast the first expensive creature. But when we put them in our decks, we are tying to cheat it in play or ramp to it. 

I guess one problem to this is how exploitable it would be for some of the secondary objectives we have.   

Tilwin90

Here is the thing: the AI is very linear. And sometimes the AI is lucky. The AI plays to win.

On the contrary, players can take very diverse decisions and sometimes are lucky too. This leads to decks constructed by players that require piloting being difficult for the AI to play.
Also players care about sub-challenges. Therefore, this most often leads to players most often slowing down and taking suboptimal choices with respect to the "just win" goal.

Now, the reason why I found I end up losing in events is not due to the AI's luck... or bad cards. Hell no, I have a pretty good collection. Instead, I find that each subchallenge complicates matters more or less... And some combinations that mix stalling and accelerated play can sometimes cause you to risk too much in order to grab all challenges. Last major event when you had to take X or less damage yet lose X or less creatures encourages
- blitz plays where you risk taking fast damage
- slow plays where if the opponent applies sufficient pressure you risk getting overrun sooner or later

If you were to play ignoring the challenges, the game would be a breeze.
Of course there are players who will attempt to minimize other players' points and play decks that ignore the objectives, but I only tried this once or twice in FIRF (the stupidest event ever) and found that by not playing vehicles I depraved myself of way too many points to be worth it.

TheDragonHermit

You know, I was thinking something like the Gambit system might be fun, it would also make a possible AI only event system where you face your deck and AI off against other people. Would make Training Grounds an actual AI training ground.

ElfNeedsFood

There are specific tournaments in Marvel Puzzle Quest where you lose some rank points when you are defeated and gain some when the AI wins with your team. You can’t exactly see win and loss rates of others, which would alleviate some of the concerns people have mentioned here. Gains and losses are much greater from the games you steer than what the game steers. 

wereotter

ElfNeedsFood said:

There are specific tournaments in Marvel Puzzle Quest where you lose some rank points when you are defeated and gain some when the AI wins with your team. You can’t exactly see win and loss rates of others, which would alleviate some of the concerns people have mentioned here. Gains and losses are much greater from the games you steer than what the game steers. 

Except there are no events in this version of the game that operate that way. So no reason to know or care how well the AI pilots your deck.

We've already seen enough trolling of people's matches before event deck slots were a thing to know why this is a bad idea, and why the players of this game can't be trusted to not make this game a toxic piece of garbage if we did have access to this feature.

ElfNeedsFood

wereotter said:
Except there are no events in this version of the game that operate that way. So no reason to know or care how well the AI pilots your deck.

So if they just structure a new event this way, we’d have a testing ground for the concept and if it creates too many problems letting people know that their 95%+ win rate probably equates to a 95%+ loss rate when Greg holds the wheel, then they can just stop putting the event on...

Gunmix25

babar3355 said:

I definitely agree a model like you are describing would be a bad thing.  However, there are a few reasons this wouldn't happen in PQ.

1. it's much more difficult to have the AI pilot our decks in a decent manner.  My white/red Nahiri deck probably takes down people from time, but it also probably takes 6 turns to hard cast Emrakul instead of casting deploy. The AI even stalled our on original Baral loop decks because it couldn't discard.

2. You can't target individual players.  You could just as easily troll your own coalition.

3. Everyone knows creatureless decks would be great troll decks in HoR, but not that many people run them.  They simply don't care enough to make it worth it.  Tie breakers are fixed and frankly the prizes aren't worth playing for.

1. It is difficult, not impossible and many players are quite clever in manipulating the AI with a build if they keep in mind its list of priorities in what it casts. Especially when it comes to looping builds. Baral would stall....eventually. but even you know how bad facing Baral was. even if and when it did stall... the build often left you with nothing to play or use in a turn; wash and repeat. So while difficult, we all know that a fully functioning AI operated build can wreck havoc. There are numerous threads in here covering that fact, many include you arguing that this was bad too, no?

2. Target players. Good point, but honestly would this really even deter players who simply are toxic gamers by nature? Highly doubt it.

3. If we didn't care... we wouldn't be playing. Seems that we do and trolling to increase one's AI win loss count would only detract from the game. Look at this way, if you can't see how well your AI build is doing... you're far less likely to try making anything that will troll others in an event. If one could see their win loss, I can bet that you would see more... players enjoy various facets of every game... for some it's the thrill of making a build that works, and for some it's the thrill of knowing you ruined someone's chances because it is funny and to them that's fun; All the more power to them.  That scenario has existed for ages in many games.

While under the present game format I understand this kind of issue is more difficult to put into play, but it isn't impossible and giving fuel to increase the frequency would be a very bad idea

Gunmix25

wereotter said:

.

We've already seen enough trolling of people's matches before event deck slots were a thing to know why this is a bad idea, and why the players of this game can't be trusted to not make this game a toxic piece of garbage if we did have access to this feature.

Ditto

Ohboy

Trolling is fine.

Just let go of the idea that you're supposed to get those bonus objectives risk free.

The fact that there's this mentality might even be an indicator that there isn't enough risk of losing right now, and if trolling achieves this, we should be OK with that

wereotter

Ohboy said:

Trolling is fine.

Just let go of the idea that you're supposed to get those bonus objectives risk free.

The fact that there's this mentality might even be an indicator that there isn't enough risk of losing right now, and if trolling achieves this, we should be OK with that

It's not that they should be achieved risk free, and more I remember still the objective of "summon exactly 2 wolves or werewolves" them being paired off against a Sorin or Liliana deck that was half creature destruction spells.

We know from past experience that if given the option, people will go out of their way to make the game more miserable for others, especially if they perceive some benefit out of it. This is a type of attitude that while we can acknowledge exists, don't need to provide additional tools to in order to make the trolling even more effective.

This isn't Grand Prix. It's a casual mobile game.

Ohboy

This is actually exactly what I'm talking about.

You take risks to fulfill objectives. You're not entitled to those points. You have to work for it. And some nodes make you work harder than others.

I really like the one you mentioned. Unlike the "kill 3 or more" objective, there's always a way to achieve it, but trying to do it puts your game in danger. This is the exact kind of example I was thinking of when I said we should have more of those.

There's a scoreboard. Some are are always going to take it more seriously than others. And just because you're not as serious as those people doesn't mean that they are wrong. From an even more casual player's perspective, they might be wondering why you're making such a big deal over a one point objective. 

Steeme

If this tool gets introduced, and I start running into grief decks, I'll stop playing.

Kinesia

I really really hate the "2 or more wolves", "2 or less creatures" one... I can do it, but it's almost impossible for _basic_ Nissa and the 2 or less creatures goes way against greens only strength and, in this, their only real path... In paper Green has more options, but the reduction to 3 stacks and creature stacking homogenises greens strategy and removes a lot from them.

Most of you keep thinking only from an endgame perspective but beginners need to be able to play in these events too and they need to be able to see a path, need to think they have a chance...

So the objectives need to be doable with the 5 basic planeswalkers and NO mythics. Not easy, not at all, but doable.

I personally want, for each event, 1 fixed 2ndary objective (for the feel of that event) and 1 random one for each node, keep the current ones in the roster but add a bunch of others too.

Tilwin90

The exactly 2 creatures stupid objective looks like a random piece of garbage they did by symmetrically combining "2 or less X type of cards" with "2 or more X type of creature" and of course the werewolf node pulled the shorter straw. Probably somebody said "Heeey, this is actually challenging, let's go like this", and there you go, bam, two stupidly incompatible objectives put together.
Supplementary this objective is practically done FOR Kiora - she is green so she can be assigned, she can fish for creatures with her second ability (so you can control that you draw at least 2) and she can also end the game with the ultimate which cheats creature tokens into play. Plus other generators like Zendikar's Roil, Part the Waterveil etc. Sure, other planeswalkers can do it, but with Kiora it's much less luck-based - ever since I switched to her, I never lost either of the two objectives even against removal heavy decks.

Ohboy

Kinesia said:

I really really hate the "2 or more wolves", "2 or less creatures" one... I can do it, but it's almost impossible for _basic_ Nissa and the 2 or less creatures goes way against greens only strength and, in this, their only real path... In paper Green has more options, but the reduction to 3 stacks and creature stacking homogenises greens strategy and removes a lot from them.

Most of you keep thinking only from an endgame perspective but beginners need to be able to play in these events too and they need to be able to see a path, need to think they have a chance...

So the objectives need to be doable with the 5 basic planeswalkers and NO mythics. Not easy, not at all, but doable.

I personally want, for each event, 1 fixed 2ndary objective (for the feel of that event) and 1 random one for each node, keep the current ones in the roster but add a bunch of others too.

I disagree. Beginners shouldn't be able to hit those objectives easily. That's the whole point of progression, and why the end game is stale. People are hitting them so easily the mentality has shifted to "everyone must hit them".

When events first started, that wasn't the case. People found it hard to hit objectives reliably, and many lost games trying to do so. To get top 5 in terrors in the shadows required you to drop less than 3 games. The top 5 point spread was large. But since everyone had a hard time, losing a point or even a game wasn't a death sentence where the scoreboard was concerned. And there was always something to improve. A higher score to get. No one complained about losing a point. They took that energy and applied themselves to get a better score.

The end game players have lost access to this great experience because the objectives have been outpaced by their powerful collections. Don't take it away from those starting out. 

hawkyh1

if I remember correctly, the objective existed before
summon did not count as cast. so summoning
tokens counted against you. I remember it as direct
damage + steal opponent creatures once you played
2 werewolves.

HH