A Nicol for your thoughts...

Kinesia

span_argoman said:

Kinesia said:

We learn, we adjust, we work around things, all that is fine.

I guess my main point that I want recognised is that this AI is very rigid and inflexible currently so the planeswalker abilities are _not_ just abilities, they explicitly change the way the AI plays, it is very very important they aren't designed just from a player perspective but from an AI perspective too.


Vraska isn't as bad because we aren't limited to 3 support slots. Her ability doesn't destroy a third of our board presence.
I personally feel Nicol goes overboard and would be better at -5/-5 instead of destroy, but that's not the point of the argument.

The point is just that these abilities affect the AI hugely and some of that needs looking at long term.

I would have thought the point should be that the AI's setting should be looked at long term instead of being lobotomised like it is now. Why cater long-term design, which affects the player experience drastically, to something that can be changed willy-nilly as has been shown in the past two AI revisions?

Absolutely, long term the AI should be able to pick what it "wants" instead of having such simple rules, but that's a really long way away.

Short term... These first abilities are going to be spammed and used far more than the 2nd or 3rd, they work totally differently than they do for a player. So they have to be designed with the way the AI will use them in mind.

_Most_ first abilities are not annoying to play against by themselves. You can just shrug and go on with your plan, only a few make you adjust.

Fixing the AI would be wonderful, but separate from that all planeswalkers should be balanced "roughly" against each other, and, yes that is very subjective. In the short term the design team has to understand how the PW abilities ar going to work in the hands of the AI right now.

andrewvanmarle

Mainloop25 said:

andrewvanmarle said:

I tend to use sirens ruse to protect the creature I want to keep and put forth a sacrificial lamb for bolas to waste his power on

Is that the spell that gives your creature hexproof for a turn? That's pretty clever.

Thank you! 

khurram

andrewvanmarle said:

Mainloop25 said:

andrewvanmarle said:

I tend to use sirens ruse to protect the creature I want to keep and put forth a sacrificial lamb for bolas to waste his power on

Is that the spell that gives your creature hexproof for a turn? That's pretty clever.

Thank you! 

"Dive Down" is the name of spell.

FeralSkald

Feel like Bolas isn't all that different from other annoying loyalty 1 PWs. I think it's just excaberated by his tri-color nature.

Off the top of my head unexpected cascade spam of first loyalty abilities from Koth, Lil 1, Ajani 1, Kiora, Vraska, Samut, Elspeth, and others can mess with your plans in various ways. You can work around all of them, I dont see Bolas as exceptional in annoyance factor. Some of the ones I listed can either keep you tapped for mana, unload entire hands, or generally keep one of your slots permanently disabled.

 Personally I dislike fighting Lil1 the most out of that list, since I swear the AI always manages a double turn into a discard when you least expect it. If you lose a fatty that way you're out all the turns pumping into it, plus another card. I'd rather it just killed something like Bolas does. 

morgue427

i hear ya there dont know how many times i got salty at my phone because of that fighting l1 lol, i find being prepared for what they could do is the safest bet not what they actually do

DumasAG

I don't necessarily think it's the spamming of the ability or the colors that are trying, I think it's the fact that his first ability (which is relatively easily reached) is straight resource advantage. Other decks need to cast a card to kill a creature, he does it for free. It's essentially drawing a kill spell and playing it in the same turn, without using resources from your hand (cards/mana). 

morgue427

sorry but by the same token bolas owner should be complaining well why dont we get a load of mana for the first ability? Other pws do bolas should too, he was bought because of it his first ability is why, still doesnt mean you dont need a kill spell in there because you cant count on it being ready when you need it is why. same with vraskas first which is cheaper to get rid of a support.

DumasAG

morgue427 said:

sorry but by the same token bolas owner should be complaining well why dont we get a load of mana for the first ability? Other pws do bolas should too, he was bought because of it his first ability is why, still doesnt mean you dont need a kill spell in there because you cant count on it being ready when you need it is why. same with vraskas first which is cheaper to get rid of a support.

I disagree, as I don't think those two abilities are even remotely close to each other in power level. Killing an opponent's creature removes one of their resources for none of yours, while mana gain allows you to play one of your resources faster, but still one of your resources. If the opponent also is gaining mana at an accelerated rate, resources would be at parity, whereas unless you're playing against the mirror or I guess Angrath, you will have the resource advantage. 

I'm not saying I think Bolas' build is wrong, I'm just stating why I believe players feel it's oppressive. It feels oppressive because his build literally gives him resource advantage (I define resource as cards in hand and in play) as the game goes long.

Snappyturtle

It's a first ability so it gets spammed by Greg. That's the annoyance for me. I've sat through games for 3-4 rounds with him sitting on his second ability just to kill any creature I would summon. I never see him making zombies.

span_argoman

Kinesia said:
Absolutely, long term the AI should be able to pick what it "wants" instead of having such simple rules, but that's a really long way away.

Short term... These first abilities are going to be spammed and used far more than the 2nd or 3rd, they work totally differently than they do for a player. So they have to be designed with the way the AI will use them in mind.

_Most_ first abilities are not annoying to play against by themselves. You can just shrug and go on with your plan, only a few make you adjust.

Fixing the AI would be wonderful, but separate from that all planeswalkers should be balanced "roughly" against each other, and, yes that is very subjective. In the short term the design team has to understand how the PW abilities ar going to work in the hands of the AI right now.

I don't agree that fixing the AI's ability firing priorities is considered far away or a long-term measure when it was only these few weeks where the AI was neutered to the point that it only uses the first ability.

Meaning to say I think that they have the means to modify the AI back to being a competent user of loyalty abilities but are held back by popular reasons rather than technical ones.

And if that's the case, I would think the short-term solution is tweaking the AI to be competent again rather than changing planeswalker design which is more or less permanent considering they are unlikely to want to amend all the planeswalker abilities when they do update the AI again.

And I agree that it would be good for the planeswalkers to be more balanced against each other but adjusting them to account for the AI's behaviour seems to be a low priority item compared to the other still unresolved issues.

wereotter

span_argoman said:

And if that's the case, I would think the short-term solution is tweaking the AI to be competent again rather than changing planeswalker design which is more or less permanent considering they are unlikely to want to amend all the planeswalker abilities when they do update the AI again.

And I agree that it would be good for the planeswalkers to be more balanced against each other but adjusting them to account for the AI's behaviour seems to be a low priority item compared to the other still unresolved issues.

Actually......

We were warned of an imminent planeswalker rebalancing as one of the tasks the new team wanted to undertake. This has yet to happen.

Now there's no reason to know if this rebalancing will apply to Bolas or not as we don't know if it was a planeswalker already designed and ready to go when they took over, of if this planeswalker is one of their design. Point is we should still be anticipating a change to at least some planeswalkers if not this one.

babar3355

ZW2007- said:

Bolas will use his second if you let him get enough loyalty most of the time. I always check his loyalty before dropping a big fatty. Generally you can wait him out and let him make some zombies.

This is mostly true.  However, if you have ANY threat on the board he will not cast his 2nd.  So if you have a hexproof creature and are waiting to drop something else, don't hold your breath.

DumasAG

span_argoman said:

Kinesia said:
Absolutely, long term the AI should be able to pick what it "wants" instead of having such simple rules, but that's a really long way away.

Short term... These first abilities are going to be spammed and used far more than the 2nd or 3rd, they work totally differently than they do for a player. So they have to be designed with the way the AI will use them in mind.

_Most_ first abilities are not annoying to play against by themselves. You can just shrug and go on with your plan, only a few make you adjust.

Fixing the AI would be wonderful, but separate from that all planeswalkers should be balanced "roughly" against each other, and, yes that is very subjective. In the short term the design team has to understand how the PW abilities ar going to work in the hands of the AI right now.

I don't agree that fixing the AI's ability firing priorities is considered far away or a long-term measure when it was only these few weeks where the AI was neutered to the point that it only uses the first ability.

Meaning to say I think that they have the means to modify the AI back to being a competent user of loyalty abilities but are held back by popular reasons rather than technical ones.

And if that's the case, I would think the short-term solution is tweaking the AI to be competent again rather than changing planeswalker design which is more or less permanent considering they are unlikely to want to amend all the planeswalker abilities when they do update the AI again.

And I agree that it would be good for the planeswalkers to be more balanced against each other but adjusting them to account for the AI's behaviour seems to be a low priority item compared to the other still unresolved issues.

I really don't understand why players want an AI that purposely can't play optimally. We don't like challenges? What's the point of even playing the game, then? It's just so... Timmy...

Kinesia

DumasAG said:

span_argoman said:

Kinesia said:
Absolutely, long term the AI should be able to pick what it "wants" instead of having such simple rules, but that's a really long way away.

Short term... These first abilities are going to be spammed and used far more than the 2nd or 3rd, they work totally differently than they do for a player. So they have to be designed with the way the AI will use them in mind.

_Most_ first abilities are not annoying to play against by themselves. You can just shrug and go on with your plan, only a few make you adjust.

Fixing the AI would be wonderful, but separate from that all planeswalkers should be balanced "roughly" against each other, and, yes that is very subjective. In the short term the design team has to understand how the PW abilities ar going to work in the hands of the AI right now.

I don't agree that fixing the AI's ability firing priorities is considered far away or a long-term measure when it was only these few weeks where the AI was neutered to the point that it only uses the first ability.

Meaning to say I think that they have the means to modify the AI back to being a competent user of loyalty abilities but are held back by popular reasons rather than technical ones.

And if that's the case, I would think the short-term solution is tweaking the AI to be competent again rather than changing planeswalker design which is more or less permanent considering they are unlikely to want to amend all the planeswalker abilities when they do update the AI again.

And I agree that it would be good for the planeswalkers to be more balanced against each other but adjusting them to account for the AI's behaviour seems to be a low priority item compared to the other still unresolved issues.

I really don't understand why players want an AI that purposely can't play optimally. We don't like challenges? What's the point of even playing the game, then? It's just so... Timmy...

I _do_ want one that plays optimally, that actually thinks about what it's doing.

"Bolas kills your creatures"
"Kiora steals your mana"
"Elspeth makes soldiers"

These are _dumb_ repetitive things that are too predictable. They just need to be balanced against each other.

If the AI were smart then I'd be thinking about totally different things and I'd totally prefer that situation.

span_argoman

Kinesia said:

DumasAG said:

I really don't understand why players want an AI that purposely can't play optimally. We don't like challenges? What's the point of even playing the game, then? It's just so... Timmy...

I _do_ want one that plays optimally, that actually thinks about what it's doing.

"Bolas kills your creatures"
"Kiora steals your mana"
"Elspeth makes soldiers"

These are _dumb_ repetitive things that are too predictable. They just need to be balanced against each other.

If the AI were smart then I'd be thinking about totally different things and I'd totally prefer that situation.

Well the fact is a lot of people don't want such an AI. Which is why the AI was nerfed so badly several weeks back and as a result there were less complaints about the AI. It's an indication of what people want.

Kinesia

span_argoman said:

Kinesia said:

DumasAG said:

I really don't understand why players want an AI that purposely can't play optimally. We don't like challenges? What's the point of even playing the game, then? It's just so... Timmy...

I _do_ want one that plays optimally, that actually thinks about what it's doing.

"Bolas kills your creatures"
"Kiora steals your mana"
"Elspeth makes soldiers"

These are _dumb_ repetitive things that are too predictable. They just need to be balanced against each other.

If the AI were smart then I'd be thinking about totally different things and I'd totally prefer that situation.

Well the fact is a lot of people don't want such an AI. Which is why the AI was nerfed so badly several weeks back and as a result there were less complaints about the AI. It's an indication of what people want.

Except most of the complaints weren't about the AI using it's abilities (some were), the majority were about the insane cascades (partly from his better matching). So the two issues of cascades and AI were conflated and both were rolled back. (And the cascades caused the 3rd abilities to be used far more too.)

It should be possible to just put back the ability use but leave the gem matching where it is now, the parts don't need to be connected. (Or just do it in platinum even.) 

wereotter

Kinesia said:

span_argoman said:

Kinesia said:

DumasAG said:

I really don't understand why players want an AI that purposely can't play optimally. We don't like challenges? What's the point of even playing the game, then? It's just so... Timmy...

I _do_ want one that plays optimally, that actually thinks about what it's doing.

"Bolas kills your creatures"
"Kiora steals your mana"
"Elspeth makes soldiers"

These are _dumb_ repetitive things that are too predictable. They just need to be balanced against each other.

If the AI were smart then I'd be thinking about totally different things and I'd totally prefer that situation.

Well the fact is a lot of people don't want such an AI. Which is why the AI was nerfed so badly several weeks back and as a result there were less complaints about the AI. It's an indication of what people want.

Except most of the complaints weren't about the AI using it's abilities (some were), the majority were about the insane cascades (partly from his better matching). So the two issues of cascades and AI were conflated and both were rolled back. (And the cascades caused the 3rd abilities to be used far more too.)

It should be possible to just put back the ability use but leave the gem matching where it is now, the parts don't need to be connected. (Or just do it in platinum even.) 

The AI before was only using more of its abilities because with more and bigger cascades, it was able to bank up the loyalty needed to get there. I found even with the smart AI, it still used its first loyalty ability every time it was an option. The differences of things like Ob Nixilis seeming to save up for an ultimate weren't really a thing as the AI didn't use its abilities when it had a full hand or when you didn't have creatures, making a final support more possible.

If anything I've seen the AI be smarter now with its loyalty abilities than it was before. Bolas being the example here will still blow up your creatures even if he can summon zombies if you have a powerful card on the board, especially a mythic rare card. I've noticed the AI will tend to prioritize mythic rare creatures to kill even over larger creatures at lower rarity.

andrewvanmarle

Switch bolas's first and second, make the destroy into Exile and done

Mburn7

andrewvanmarle said:

Switch bolas's first and second, make the destroy into Exile and done

I can't tell if that's more OP or less.  Definitely would be interesting.  Not sure if its the best thing for the game.

wereotter

Mburn7 said:

andrewvanmarle said:

Switch bolas's first and second, make the destroy into Exile and done

I can't tell if that's more OP or less.  Definitely would be interesting.  Not sure if its the best thing for the game.

Probably would have to make fewer zombies to not be over powered if this was implemented. Drawing cards and getting an 8/8 creature pile is too much for 9 loyalty. Probably only 2 2/2 zombies and card draw