2.5 Release Notes (3/13/18)

Brigby

GrizzoMtGPQ said:

Maybe the AI could just be this hard for Platinum players? That would be cool. Let the mortals play against the easy AI.

The AI is primarily being toned down for content aimed towards newer players. Events will still have strong AI, especially the further into the event players go, however not to the extent that Ixalan had.

hawkyh1

imo the ai should be smarter. big cascades by both players
however needs to feel a lot less normal. I feel that not
allowing the ai to make match 5's is going backwards.
there is however something very wrong with the recent
number of match 5's and match 5 traps.
I don't like lumping these two together under the harder ai
banner. additional improvements in cards played is very
welcome but so is easing off the impact of cascades.

HH

khurram

Brigby said:

GrizzoMtGPQ said:

Maybe the AI could just be this hard for Platinum players? That would be cool. Let the mortals play against the easy AI.

The AI is primarily being toned down for content aimed towards newer players. Events will still have strong AI, especially the further into the event players go, however not to the extent that Ixalan had.

This is interesting. I was afraid that Greg would become super dumb again. Still misses an occasional match-5 btw.

jtwood

Brigby said:

GrizzoMtGPQ said:

Maybe the AI could just be this hard for Platinum players? That would be cool. Let the mortals play against the easy AI.

The AI is primarily being toned down for content aimed towards newer players. Events will still have strong AI, especially the further into the event players go, however not to the extent that Ixalan had.

This sounds great. I mean, I liked full-bore Greg, but if this is the compromise I have to give in order to keep a tougher opponent, I’m all for it. 

Kinesia

@hawkyh1
I agree that the cascades are the problem, not the AI but the changes happened at the same time and many players blame the AI changes, but it's the huge cascades that need reining in. (And they happen to players too, it's just most people notice them happening to the AI more.)

IM_CARLOS

After seven month Hou as "newest" ixhalan leaves after one  month, even before it went to booster crafting ? Come on what's the plan? Okay IX is mediocre at best, but everybody who put a lot of crystal or worser real money on it get <insert buzzword  here>.

Why should I pay for next set if it is dead on arrival like the last one? 

Firinmahlazer

IM_CARLOS said:

After seven month Hou as "newest" ixhalan leaves after one  month, even before it went to booster crafting ? Come on what's the plan? Okay IX is mediocre at best, but everybody who put a lot of crystal or worser real money on it get <insert buzzword  here>.

Why should I pay for next set if it is dead on arrival like the last one? 

Uuhhh. Then don't? No part of the game requires you buy anything. Buying stuff gets you more, faster but eventually everything is available for free. You don't like RIX when it drops? Don't spend money on it! It's so easy!

babar3355

hawkyh1 said:

imo the ai should be smarter. big cascades by both players
however needs to feel a lot less normal. I feel that not
allowing the ai to make match 5's is going backwards.
there is however something very wrong with the recent
number of match 5's and match 5 traps.
I don't like lumping these two together under the harder ai
banner. additional improvements in cards played is very
welcome but so is easing off the impact of cascades.

HH

This is such an odd comment.  You have to be convinced that the AI knows what is behind the top of the screen and target superior outcomes to think that this makes sense.  All of the developers deny this and of the community programmers and stat's guys indicate that the data seems random. 

So, either there is a conspiracy and it isn't actually random.  Or you are asking them to manipulate the game to NOT be random in order to get less match 5s...

madwren

IM_CARLOS said:

After seven month Hou as "newest" ixhalan leaves after one  month, even before it went to booster crafting ? Come on what's the plan? Okay IX is mediocre at best, but everybody who put a lot of crystal or worser real money on it get <insert buzzword  here>.

Why should I pay for next set if it is dead on arrival like the last one? 

The stated goal was to catch up with paper release. The gap between HOU and XLN wasn't intentional--they literally changed game developers. When XLN was released, it was reasonable to assume there was only going to be a short while before RIX was subsequently released.

With Dominaria due in mid-April, I wouldn't be surprised if RIX also has a more compressed time frame, but after they release Dominaria in PQ (I estimate end of April, but could be surprised), nothing's going to leave after a month because more sets won't actually exist.

Seriously, despite the bugs, the fact they're turning around two sets in this small time frame is a testament to the amount of work Oktagon's been putting in.  Now if they'd just squeeze in time to fix the bugs..

wereotter

madwren said:

IM_CARLOS said:

After seven month Hou as "newest" ixhalan leaves after one  month, even before it went to booster crafting ? Come on what's the plan? Okay IX is mediocre at best, but everybody who put a lot of crystal or worser real money on it get <insert buzzword  here>.

Why should I pay for next set if it is dead on arrival like the last one? 

The stated goal was to catch up with paper release. The gap between HOU and XLN wasn't intentional--they literally changed game developers. When XLN was released, it was reasonable to assume there was only going to be a short while before RIX was subsequently released.

With Dominaria due in mid-April, I wouldn't be surprised if RIX also has a more compressed time frame, but after they release Dominaria in PQ (I estimate end of April, but could be surprised), nothing's going to leave after a month because more sets won't actually exist.

Seriously, despite the bugs, the fact they're turning around two sets in this small time frame is a testament to the amount of work Oktagon's been putting in.  Now if they'd just squeeze in time to fix the bugs..

I legitimately don't understand the rush .The Innistrad sets were released in their day after Kaladesh sets were already out.

Waiting for the sets to be announced is actually GOOD for the game when you consider that they get more time to see what's coming an tweak cards to work together more fluidly with upcoming sets, and can release product that's not riddled with bugs. I think more people were antsy that there wasn't anything new at all for so long than were concerned that we had fallen so far behind the paper release schedule.

I, personally, would prefer more time to play with and build a collection of Ixalan cards before being thrown two sets forward in a matter of months, especially since Rivals is going to be a full set release rather than an expansion to the existing Ixalan packs.

hawkyh1

babar3355 said:

hawkyh1 said:

imo the ai should be smarter. big cascades by both players
however needs to feel a lot less normal. I feel that not
allowing the ai to make match 5's is going backwards.
there is however something very wrong with the recent
number of match 5's and match 5 traps.
I don't like lumping these two together under the harder ai
banner. additional improvements in cards played is very
welcome but so is easing off the impact of cascades.

HH

This is such an odd comment.  You have to be convinced that the AI knows what is behind the top of the screen and target superior outcomes to think that this makes sense.  All of the developers deny this and of the community programmers and stat's guys indicate that the data seems random. 

So, either there is a conspiracy and it isn't actually random.  Or you are asking them to manipulate the game to NOT be random in order to get less match 5s...

my view is random number generators have a length of
sequence when on average they revert to the mean. the
longer the sequence is the more out of whack the
numbers can be. simple rng's is like picking the numbers
1-6 from a hat. in this case every number can only be
picked once and it reverts to the mean after the 6th
number is picked. more complicated rng's have lots of
1-6's and allows for chains of 3x6 etc. choosing lots of 1-6
that reverts back to the mean after many more times than
turns that battles last for would make rng too dominant.
(you can end up rolling 1's until after the battle has finished
if you are very unlucky) rng can be still be random but also
unsuitable for the expected likelihood of outcomes. what
I'm saying is to choose an rng sample size that usually
reverts back to the mean sooner so to avoid long streaks
of good/bad luck. luck play it's part but should not be the
'be all and end all'? choosing to allow the rng to be so
dominant is not a technical fault of the rng itself but of the
choices made about how it's being used.

I'm convinced that there is something wrong with how it is
now and it's not because greg can finally choose to make
match 5's.

HH

babar3355

I thought they were actually random.  I.E. 1/6 probability of every gem every time.  Why does there need to be a reversion to the mean? 

And if there was reversion to the mean, why would this theoretically be valuable to the player or the AI when it comes to gem color?  How does the computer know which gem you want in which slot?  We aren't playing **** here... if anything we are playing Yahtzee.  Sometimes I need a white gem for a good combo or a match 5, while other times I need a black one.

I am just saying.  Perhaps its actually just random and you are making assumptions that it isn't because biased perception?

Anyway, back to topic.  I am excited about this patch.  When can we get a card preview???

GrizzoMtGPQ

@Brigby any word on when 2.5 will come out?

madwren

wereotter said:

madwren said:

IM_CARLOS said:

After seven month Hou as "newest" ixhalan leaves after one  month, even before it went to booster crafting ? Come on what's the plan? Okay IX is mediocre at best, but everybody who put a lot of crystal or worser real money on it get <insert buzzword  here>.

Why should I pay for next set if it is dead on arrival like the last one? 

The stated goal was to catch up with paper release. The gap between HOU and XLN wasn't intentional--they literally changed game developers. When XLN was released, it was reasonable to assume there was only going to be a short while before RIX was subsequently released.

With Dominaria due in mid-April, I wouldn't be surprised if RIX also has a more compressed time frame, but after they release Dominaria in PQ (I estimate end of April, but could be surprised), nothing's going to leave after a month because more sets won't actually exist.

Seriously, despite the bugs, the fact they're turning around two sets in this small time frame is a testament to the amount of work Oktagon's been putting in.  Now if they'd just squeeze in time to fix the bugs..

I legitimately don't understand the rush .The Innistrad sets were released in their day after Kaladesh sets were already out.

You're forgetting, however, that Hibernum also made it a goal to catch back up with paper release schedule, and they succeeded.

It's a reasonable assumption that goal isn't going to change, and might even have its impetus in the licensing agreement with Wizards of the Coast, who has a much more vested interest in seeing their current product reflected, rather than one that's months out of date.  Here are the release dates for the sets:

August 11, 2016 - Shadows of Innistrad released (April 8, 2016 in paper)
October 19, 2016 - Eldritch Moon released (July 22, 2016 in paper)
Dec 8, 2016 - Kaladesh (released Sep 30, 2016 in paper)
Feb 2, 2017 - Aether Revolt (released Jan 14, 2017 in paper)
May 16, 2017 - Amonkhet (released April 15, 2017 in paper)
Jul 25, 2017 - Hour of Devastation (released July 14, 2017 in paper)

Catching up is what they wanted, and that's what they did, and that's what they've said their priority is again. I don't mean this in a snarky way, but how you or I feel about how fast sets should come out is irrelevant.

wereotter

Obviously not, my point is more that unless they're getting advance notice of what cards are coming in sets while designing the translation of cards into this game, they run the risk of omitting what might seem like minor details, or overpowering certain cards because they don't see the value right now, when in fact the cards are suddenly much better one or two sets later when combined with other cards.

They've done this in the past, and there's already a looming issue right now where none of the creatures in game have the "legendary" tag on them, yet several spells in the upcoming Dominaria set require you to control a legendary creature or planeswalker in order to even cast the spell at all. Which means either that mechanic will have to be nerfed, or dozens of creatures will have to be adjusted and flagged appropriately.

I get that Wizards would want to use this as a promotional engine for their latest sets, just don't want this game to suffer as a result is all.

Brigby

*Updated to Final Release Notes. Added section discussing Card Balance Adjustments

THEMAGICkMAN

ok.. firstly it's awesome that you revisited ixalan cards, and at a glance these changes seem very very beneficial.

but the elephant is still in the room: will non-ixalan cards be getting balance changes? what about older planeswalkers? 

Mainloop25

Im actually really happy with a lot of the card rebalances. It is in line with what I may have done . I especially appreciate the effort to take into consideration the community feedback and address it in a timely manner. 

madwren

So, on first glance, I commend the balancing changes. Well done.  I'll be sad to see Captivating Crew nerfed, though. I'm not kidding when I say I triggered it twice every turn with activate 5.

ALEJANDROID

madwren said:

So, on first glance, I commend the balancing changes. Well done.  I'll be sad to see Captivating Crew nerfed, though. I'm not kidding when I say I triggered it twice every turn with activate 5.

It was quite the deal, and will be very missed