Duel Decks: Zendikar vs Eldrazi - Feedback
Brakkis
Posts: 777 Critical Contributor
It is unfortunate to learn that though a large portion of the players who participated in the beta were unhappy with the second iteration's changes, and indeed submitted that as feedback and suggested that changes be made before the official release, we find ourselves with the official release of the event being an exact mirror of the second beta. It would seem as though no changes were made between the second beta and the actual release. Now some of this may be changed once the event starts, and I will edit this post accordingly; however, at this time we are apparently seeing nothing to indicate anything else was changed and so, I will offer some initial feedback.
So what was changed between one and the other?
Well, as Brigby posted, there were the changes made to the objectives, refresh timers, and overall event time. But also to the rewards structure.
So here's my personal feedback on these changes. I can say that most of this was echoed by a rather decent portion of my fellow beta testers.
Ambush: Summon 3 or more Creatures during a single turn.
Geomancer played to the Planeswalkers abilities and strengths and so it was a natural objective to have there. Ambush is a fitting tertiary objective to match with Geomancer. Pauper is a terrible objective in regards to a PvP node. That was one of the first responses when it was announced that Pauper was going to be an objective in the game during the change to RotGP's objectives; Don't put it in a PvP node.
Striker: Deal 16 or more damage during a single turn.
PvP
Emrakul's Emergence: Summon 5 or more Eldrazi during a single turn.
Artificer: Cast 4 or more supports during a single fight
Once again, Emrakul's Emergence actually fits the theme of the Planeswalker and is a natural objective to feature in this situation. Artificer isn't exactly a matched tertiary to the other but it's far and away a better objective to have in a PvP node than Pauper. Striker in the PvE node serves as a fitting mirror to Nissa's Bounty Hunter objective.
The 10 minute timer on the refreshes could be considered too much. It resulted in the illusion of time pressure on players who wanted to grind runes and also felt compelled to participate in the Coalition event being run at the same times. There was no actual pressure because there are no "progression" rewards to attain in Duel Decks, nor a Coalition rank to achieve. The rewards for winning and losing are so close that outside of winning on each side once to attain the exclusive mythic, it's actually nearly irrelevant whether you win or lose. So really, the entirety of the PvP phases was a rune grind that at best could net you 230,000 or so runes if you ground it non-stop. But, that is entirely optional and you don't need to do that.
However, the consensus came to be that if the timer were to be changed to help alter that perception, a 30 minute refresh on charges during those phases would result in sufficient content and play time without inundating the players without hundreds of thousands of runes.
A 5 and a half hour refresh gives players, at best, 5 extra matches over a 30 hour period. That's pitiful and results in almost no game play. Certainly not enough to justify not running a coaltion event alongside the duel decks.
The PvP phases are where the real meat of the event takes place. Both of it's phases should last longer than 12 hours to account for timezone variables. The PvE phase can be done at any point during the event so even if you jump in during the Final Duel phase, you can still knock that out and then jump into the Final Duel.
The first beta awarded 200 pinks for completing both sides of the Challenge phase (100 from each side). Granted, that is far too much. But reducing those to 10 from each is a massive drop. You could have halved them and run Duel Decks once a month for a solid 100 jewel gain each month. Or quartered them and run it twice a month for the same result.
Now on to some comments and questions that we all had regarding the event itself that we have yet to get answers for.
1. What is the purpose of the Duel and Final Duel phases being separate?
- While a silly question at first glance, it's really more of "What is the reason for the Duel phase?" because from what we could all tell, the Duel phase has no bearing on the Final Duel. At the end of both beta's, the "Leading" side didn't start with an advantage in the Clash Bar of the Final Duel so the first Duel phase seemingly serves no overall purpose.
2. Can who is winning be made more clear?
- The clash bar is a fancy graphic, but unless one side is just absolutely dominating the other, we actually have no clue who is winning, or by how much. We had to drop screenshots into Photoshop and measure the pixels to see who was leading during the first beta. We'd very much like a numerical system added that shows how many victories each side has.
3. Do the secondary objectives during the Duel and Final Duel phases actually contribute to your side's "score"?
- Aside from earning them once each to get the rewards from them, do they actually have any bearing on your side's duel score? Or is just winning the only thing that contributes to the "Leading" or the clash bar moving?
So what was changed between one and the other?
Well, as Brigby posted, there were the changes made to the objectives, refresh timers, and overall event time. But also to the rewards structure.
Brigby said:Hi Everyone. Once I gather all the information I need, I'll be sure to create an Event Detail page for Zendikar vs Eldrazi. In the meantime though, here is a brief overview of some of the battle details that were changed:
Phase Start/End TimesObjectives - Playing As Nissa (PvE)
- Challenge Phase: 22h -> 18h
- Duel Phase: 8h -> 18h
- Final Duel Phase: 24h -> 12h
- Total: 54h -> 48h
Objectives - Playing As Nissa (PvP)
- Call to Arms: Create 16 or more Creature Tokens... -> Create 22 or more Creature Tokens...
- Spell Caster -> Bounty Hunter: Deal 20 or more damage to a Planeswalker during a turn.
Objectives - Playing as The Eldrazi (PvE)
- Geomancer -> Prodigal: Win with only cards that costs 11 or more mana.
- Ambush -> Pauper: Win with only Common and Uncommon cards.
Objectives - Playing As The Eldrazi (PvP)
- Call to Arms: Create 16 or more Creature Tokens... -> Create 20 or more Creature Tokens...
- Striker -> Mightstone: Cast 3 or more creatures with power 6 or more.
Charges
- Emrakul's Emergence -> Prodigal: Win with only cards that costs 11 or more mana.
- Artificer -> Pauper: Win with only Common and Uncommon cards.
- Initial Charges: 2 -> 0
- Maximum Charges: No change
- Recharge Time: 10 min -> 5 hrs 30 min
So here's my personal feedback on these changes. I can say that most of this was echoed by a rather decent portion of my fellow beta testers.
- Nissa's PvP objective's should have remained as -
Ambush: Summon 3 or more Creatures during a single turn.
Geomancer played to the Planeswalkers abilities and strengths and so it was a natural objective to have there. Ambush is a fitting tertiary objective to match with Geomancer. Pauper is a terrible objective in regards to a PvP node. That was one of the first responses when it was announced that Pauper was going to be an objective in the game during the change to RotGP's objectives; Don't put it in a PvP node.
- The Eldrazi's PvE objective 3 and both PvP objectives should have remained as -
Striker: Deal 16 or more damage during a single turn.
PvP
Emrakul's Emergence: Summon 5 or more Eldrazi during a single turn.
Artificer: Cast 4 or more supports during a single fight
Once again, Emrakul's Emergence actually fits the theme of the Planeswalker and is a natural objective to feature in this situation. Artificer isn't exactly a matched tertiary to the other but it's far and away a better objective to have in a PvP node than Pauper. Striker in the PvE node serves as a fitting mirror to Nissa's Bounty Hunter objective.
- The charges during the Duel/Final Duel phases need to be drastically lowered from 5 hrs 30 min back to either 10 minutes, or to a solid 30 minute timer.
The 10 minute timer on the refreshes could be considered too much. It resulted in the illusion of time pressure on players who wanted to grind runes and also felt compelled to participate in the Coalition event being run at the same times. There was no actual pressure because there are no "progression" rewards to attain in Duel Decks, nor a Coalition rank to achieve. The rewards for winning and losing are so close that outside of winning on each side once to attain the exclusive mythic, it's actually nearly irrelevant whether you win or lose. So really, the entirety of the PvP phases was a rune grind that at best could net you 230,000 or so runes if you ground it non-stop. But, that is entirely optional and you don't need to do that.
However, the consensus came to be that if the timer were to be changed to help alter that perception, a 30 minute refresh on charges during those phases would result in sufficient content and play time without inundating the players without hundreds of thousands of runes.
A 5 and a half hour refresh gives players, at best, 5 extra matches over a 30 hour period. That's pitiful and results in almost no game play. Certainly not enough to justify not running a coaltion event alongside the duel decks.
- Change the Phase times. Swap the Final Duel time frame with the Challenge phase's time frame.
The PvP phases are where the real meat of the event takes place. Both of it's phases should last longer than 12 hours to account for timezone variables. The PvE phase can be done at any point during the event so even if you jump in during the Final Duel phase, you can still knock that out and then jump into the Final Duel.
- The rewards for the Challenge phase were drastically reduced from the first beta to the second beta. Please reduce them less.
The first beta awarded 200 pinks for completing both sides of the Challenge phase (100 from each side). Granted, that is far too much. But reducing those to 10 from each is a massive drop. You could have halved them and run Duel Decks once a month for a solid 100 jewel gain each month. Or quartered them and run it twice a month for the same result.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now on to some comments and questions that we all had regarding the event itself that we have yet to get answers for.
1. What is the purpose of the Duel and Final Duel phases being separate?
- While a silly question at first glance, it's really more of "What is the reason for the Duel phase?" because from what we could all tell, the Duel phase has no bearing on the Final Duel. At the end of both beta's, the "Leading" side didn't start with an advantage in the Clash Bar of the Final Duel so the first Duel phase seemingly serves no overall purpose.
2. Can who is winning be made more clear?
- The clash bar is a fancy graphic, but unless one side is just absolutely dominating the other, we actually have no clue who is winning, or by how much. We had to drop screenshots into Photoshop and measure the pixels to see who was leading during the first beta. We'd very much like a numerical system added that shows how many victories each side has.
3. Do the secondary objectives during the Duel and Final Duel phases actually contribute to your side's "score"?
- Aside from earning them once each to get the rewards from them, do they actually have any bearing on your side's duel score? Or is just winning the only thing that contributes to the "Leading" or the clash bar moving?
5
Comments
-
Recent reply from Brigby:
"While I personally haven't seen all the individual feedback comments (there were over 1,100 participants that provided comments), my assumption is that the team derives the reasoning for their actions based on the majority of players' responses. "
So, he is assuming the majority of players loved beta 2 so much that no changes were necessary.
So, apparently the team thinks people are happy with it, and that what has been happening on thus forum just isn't a common opinion of beta 2. So, uhm, guess its just whining and people very secretly love the current state if duel decks?0 -
A bold claim - yet, as it happens, my beta feedback to Oktagon did indeed include all of the above.Brakkis said:
Now on to some comments and questions that we all had regarding the event itself that we have yet to get answers for.
1. What is the purpose of the Duel and Final Duel phases being separate?
2. Can who is winning be made more clear?
3. Do the secondary objectives during the Duel and Final Duel phases actually contribute to your side's "score"?
1 -
Great thread @Brakkis thanks for starting it. It just so happens that I saved my feedback from the second run of the beta. Here is what I said:
1. The decks in the first phase are awful; they are poorly thought out and not fun to play. Please make them better — or better yet let the (forum) community do it.
2. BOREFEST — The second run of this event was awful. Recharges were way too long for the final phase. The third node should be a grind-a-thon like QB— bring back 10 minute recharges!
3. You always underestimate how strong the community is for this event. We joined together to stack sides and then those not in the loop were able to easily hop on. Stacking only works because people can see who is winning in the second phase — make it a mystery — we should never see who is leading in the second phase.
4. Per above — each phase should be cleared to move on to the next — including objectives — if you don’t get all rewards in phase one, you shouldn’t be able to move to phase 2, same with phase 2 and final duel.
5. The event should be tiered (for matchmaking not rewards — like Training Grounds) New players were really upset about playing decks like mine (Omni, Deploy, Drowner, Emrakul). Bronze players should not have to face Platinum collections.
6. First and second phases should be 12 hours. Third should be 24.
7. Make the bar better please — it was a bit better this time, but it’s still not where it should be.
8. The objectives in the second run were just god awful.
9. We have no idea how we are adding points in the second and final phases — Do objectives add points? Is it just wins? It’s very confusing.
10. If objectives do count, see #8.
5 -
bken1234 said:Great thread @Brakkis thanks for starting it. It just so happens that I saved my feedback from the second run of the beta. Here is what I said:
1. The decks in the first phase are awful; they are poorly thought out and not fun to play. Please make them better — or better yet let the (forum) community do it.
8. The objectives in the second run were just god awful.
Quoted for truth.
"Hmm, Ed dropped a second-turn Ulamog. How do I get rid of it? Ok, first I need to summon 10 power in creatures, then I need to cast an 11-mana support (or a 14-mana creature with activate gems) to allow them to berserker into it, while hoping that they don't get immediately Scoured or run face-first into Scions, all while facing a board full of void gems that negate all my converters every round. Fantastic! Oh wait, never mind, I still lose because I need to summon 22 tinykitty tokens instead."
Thank the gods they let us edit the deck after the first round, but man, making the game arbitrarily arduous because of poor deck design is not entertaining.
2 -
What really bothers me is because this is an “all levels” event, there is such a valuable teaching moment here. Providing a deck that is well built both for objectives and to face a specific PW sets a good example for newer players.madwren said:bken1234 said:Great thread @Brakkis thanks for starting it. It just so happens that I saved my feedback from the second run of the beta. Here is what I said:
1. The decks in the first phase are awful; they are poorly thought out and not fun to play. Please make them better — or better yet let the (forum) community do it.
8. The objectives in the second run were just god awful.
Quoted for truth.
"Hmm, Ed dropped a second-turn Ulamog. How do I get rid of it? Ok, first I need to summon 10 power in creatures, then I need to cast an 11-mana support (or a 14-mana creature with activate gems) to allow them to berserker into it, while hoping that they don't get immediately Scoured or run face-first into Scions, all while facing a board full of void gems that negate all my converters every round. Fantastic! Oh wait, never mind, I still lose because I need to summon 22 tinykitty tokens instead."
Thank the gods they let us edit the deck after the first round, but man, making the game arbitrarily arduous because of poor deck design is not entertaining.3 -
Excellent point.bken1234 said:
What really bothers me is because this is an “all levels” event, there is such a valuable teaching moment here. Providing a deck that is well built both for objectives and to face a specific PW sets a good example for newer players.madwren said:bken1234 said:Great thread @Brakkis thanks for starting it. It just so happens that I saved my feedback from the second run of the beta. Here is what I said:
1. The decks in the first phase are awful; they are poorly thought out and not fun to play. Please make them better — or better yet let the (forum) community do it.
8. The objectives in the second run were just god awful.
Quoted for truth.
"Hmm, Ed dropped a second-turn Ulamog. How do I get rid of it? Ok, first I need to summon 10 power in creatures, then I need to cast an 11-mana support (or a 14-mana creature with activate gems) to allow them to berserker into it, while hoping that they don't get immediately Scoured or run face-first into Scions, all while facing a board full of void gems that negate all my converters every round. Fantastic! Oh wait, never mind, I still lose because I need to summon 22 tinykitty tokens instead."
Thank the gods they let us edit the deck after the first round, but man, making the game arbitrarily arduous because of poor deck design is not entertaining.
At this point I'd give them 10 crystals to let me do them the favor of putting Rabid Bite in their deck.1 -
I see your 10 crystals and raise 5 jewels to get Nissa’s Pilgrimage added.madwren said:
Excellent point.bken1234 said:
What really bothers me is because this is an “all levels” event, there is such a valuable teaching moment here. Providing a deck that is well built both for objectives and to face a specific PW sets a good example for newer players.madwren said:bken1234 said:Great thread @Brakkis thanks for starting it. It just so happens that I saved my feedback from the second run of the beta. Here is what I said:
1. The decks in the first phase are awful; they are poorly thought out and not fun to play. Please make them better — or better yet let the (forum) community do it.
8. The objectives in the second run were just god awful.
Quoted for truth.
"Hmm, Ed dropped a second-turn Ulamog. How do I get rid of it? Ok, first I need to summon 10 power in creatures, then I need to cast an 11-mana support (or a 14-mana creature with activate gems) to allow them to berserker into it, while hoping that they don't get immediately Scoured or run face-first into Scions, all while facing a board full of void gems that negate all my converters every round. Fantastic! Oh wait, never mind, I still lose because I need to summon 22 tinykitty tokens instead."
Thank the gods they let us edit the deck after the first round, but man, making the game arbitrarily arduous because of poor deck design is not entertaining.
At this point I'd give them 10 crystals to let me do them the favor of putting Rabid Bite in their deck.0 -
I agree with everything said above.I want to add :This event would benefit so greatly from being set restricted like no other event, because..- it already gives cards for a full deck as progression rewards in the first stage = everybody can at least play-the flavor would benefit a lot! Right now it doesn't really feel like ZvsE, since most decks are the usual suspects.. In green I went Rashmi loop, later ghalta spam . Feels wrong, but it's the most effective approach-it'd be fun!Well.. A normal booster on top for the rewards would be a good thing then.1
-
Wouldn't be awesome if they let the community build the decks for the next rendition of the dual deck format? We submit decks, vote on them, winners are chosen and decks pre-built.
Thank the gods they let us edit the deck after the first round, but man, making the game arbitrarily arduous because of poor deck design is not entertaining.2 -
@Brakkis I agree with you 100%.
I still do not understand why there are three phases, just two are needed and it will be much better regardless where the players live.
I asked in my feedback form for the second an thrid phases, a fixed number of charges not needing to wait any time to play them.
They said the beta 2 had over 1.100 feedback forms, have they read them all? in less than a week? So, most of the people have agreed with the second beta terms, as nothing has been changed.1 -
This content has been removed.
-
Some of the new cards are definitely playable in legacy. Just mostly not the ones in the pre-built decks (but a couple of the mythics seem fun).My biggest issue is the lack of synergy in the Eldrazi deck. You ingest a lot of gems, but almost none of your cards have devoid. That just means that you are hurt by the void gems just as much as Nissa, which kind of defeats that point. I have put that in both feedback forms, btw.2
-
The only major synergies I made out at Ted are the two mythics creatures - ulamog creates enough void gems so other can spam skions + the other scion generators.. And the spell giving +3/-3 which is a great mana boost.I find it way more easy to reliably win with nissa. Sure, she could take more ramp, but it's hard to loose, even against an early ulamog.All the pre AER pw decks are made by player submissions, but the contest was restricted by specific conditions (set, rarity). If you see only the set they're from, the decks are great - but that never has been the way they're used. Everything after aer looks like randomly generated0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Terry said:bken1234 said:Great thread @Brakkis thanks for starting it. It just so happens that I saved my feedback from the second run of the beta. Here is what I said:
1. The decks in the first phase are awful; they are poorly thought out and not fun to play. Please make them better — or better yet let the (forum) community do it.
Note: I've not written any of this to push forward the claim that either deck is stronger than the other; merely to highlight the fact that playing Nissa results in a major lack of interaction. If you get lucky you win easily, and if you don't you die easily.Right? The lack of interactions is a great point. For example, for the 22 tokens, the best solution seems to be purposefully not casting much of anything until one can activate Nissa's second ability, then summoning 22 elemental tokens in short succession. Which is pretty boring.0 -
Mburn7 said:Some of the new cards are definitely playable in legacy. Just mostly not the ones in the pre-built decks (but a couple of the mythics seem fun).My biggest issue is the lack of synergy in the Eldrazi deck. You ingest a lot of gems, but almost none of your cards have devoid. That just means that you are hurt by the void gems just as much as Nissa, which kind of defeats that point. I have put that in both feedback forms, btw.The void/devoid thing is definitely an issue, though it bears mentioning that it's somewhat due to the way Hibernum originally designed the set mechanics, which has been the subject of numerous complaints over the year.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Yes. They were altered and the winners were never announced. They contest was a stain on this community.journeymage said:
Theyve been altered haven't they? I thought theyd been changed from the decks submitted.Laeuftbeidir said:All the pre AER pw decks are made by player submissions, but the contest was restricted by specific conditions (set, rarity). If you see only the set they're from, the decks are great - but that never has been the way they're used. Everything after aer looks like randomly generated
Whch ones do you think are great?1 -
bken1234 said:
Yes. They were altered and the winners were never announced. They contest was a stain on this community.journeymage said:
Theyve been altered haven't they? I thought theyd been changed from the decks submitted.Laeuftbeidir said:All the pre AER pw decks are made by player submissions, but the contest was restricted by specific conditions (set, rarity). If you see only the set they're from, the decks are great - but that never has been the way they're used. Everything after aer looks like randomly generated
Whch ones do you think are great?You got me there. I only remember my impression from the submissions, and didn't compare the outcome with it.That's really bad how they screwed it up. The contest was the most positive and productive phase I remember in this forum!0 -
I came here to say this. It’s really frustrating! As much as I love ulamog, there’s no point if none of *my* cards have devoid.Mburn7 said:Some of the new cards are definitely playable in legacy. Just mostly not the ones in the pre-built decks (but a couple of the mythics seem fun).My biggest issue is the lack of synergy in the Eldrazi deck. You ingest a lot of gems, but almost none of your cards have devoid. That just means that you are hurt by the void gems just as much as Nissa, which kind of defeats that point. I have put that in both feedback forms, btw.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 44.8K Marvel Puzzle Quest
- 1.5K MPQ News and Announcements
- 20.3K MPQ General Discussion
- 3K MPQ Tips and Guides
- 2K MPQ Character Discussion
- 171 MPQ Supports Discussion
- 2.5K MPQ Events, Tournaments, and Missions
- 2.8K MPQ Alliances
- 6.3K MPQ Suggestions and Feedback
- 6.2K MPQ Bugs and Technical Issues
- 13.6K Magic: The Gathering - Puzzle Quest
- 503 MtGPQ News & Announcements
- 5.4K MtGPQ General Discussion
- 99 MtGPQ Tips & Guides
- 421 MtGPQ Deck Strategy & Planeswalker Discussion
- 298 MtGPQ Events
- 60 MtGPQ Coalitions
- 1.2K MtGPQ Suggestions & Feedback
- 5.6K MtGPQ Bugs & Technical Issues
- 548 Other 505 Go Inc. Games
- 21 Puzzle Quest: The Legend Returns
- 5 Adventure Gnome
- 6 Word Designer: Country Home
- 381 Other Games
- 142 General Discussion
- 239 Off Topic
- 7 505 Go Inc. Forum Rules
- 7 Forum Rules and Site Announcements