3.3 Release Notes *Updated (4/3/19)

PerishFrance

Sorry for posting here but I'm not sure I understood (I looked for the update and found this thread) Do the guy who wrote this messed up or what people are saying really the design of the feature? either way something sounds dumb... I though the game was PVE so I can plan my choices and matches, not sure how limiting my turn and adding less and less seconds helps

Matthew

jimpark said:

Matthew said:

Brakkis said:

Brigby said:

Hi Everyone. Thanks for providing all of this in-depth perspective and feedback of the loop system. I'll be sure to pass that along to the team for review.

While I can't guarantee that any changes can be made prior to the 3.3 update going live, as I believe the build has already been submitted to 1st party vendors, I will definitely talk to them about revisiting the system and seeing where things can be adjusted.

This right here is why things like this should be brought up before the patch is submitted and it's too late to make any kind of changes. This was a solution to a relatively minor problem in the overall scheme of the game and it was extremely poorly thought out. There are far superior methods of fixing this, again - minor, problem that don't outright tank an entire playstyle.

One thing I forgot to mention in my own earlier post is mentioned here by Brakkis. The overall impact of this problem, however annoying it is, is minimal at the absolute worst. Personally I can't even remember the last time I've been caught by Greg in a loop of any sort. That illustrates that they either don't occur with any serious degree of frequency, or that when they do occur, I can simply hit the "quit" button to end them, or most likely both of these things. This decision makes it look like you guys heard a vocal minority complaining about something and decided to implement a nuclear option to address it. Terrible decision, and I really, really, really hope it is reversed.

i just want to add at lesser card collections / newer players get stuck in overpowered loops more frequently. Veterans, on the other hand, we have strong enough collections to counteract these loop decks by speed bashing the AI, usually through a loop. Therefore, i do believe it is a problem but the way they addressed it was terrible.

I don't understand why this happened, other than:

1) there is no strategist at this company or dev team

2) nobody seems to really play MTGPQ at this company or the dev team (or at least not enough)

3) they don't consider the possible consequences with each change

4) things feel rushed to meet deadlines so they have terrible scheduling to ensure a quality update/product

I have been in Platinum for about two years now, so it’s safe to say that I’m pretty out of touch with the state of things at the lower tiers. You are right to call me out for that. Thanks for making me realize it! The last thing I want is for newer players to have bad experiences and just stop playing because of them.

However, this has also given me a thought that I think is worth considering. If the dev team is dead set on going this route AND what you say is true (that loops are a much bigger problem for players at lower levels) then why not ONLY apply this timer to those levels? Bronze could have a pretty short timer (18 seconds anyone?) and it could be longer for Silver, longer still for Gold, and just completely done away with for Platinum.

This way, newer players with limited collections could get a softer introduction to the game and then gradually be weaned off of the training wheels as they progress. It would also allow Platinum to stay hyper competitive, which is how it freaking SHOULD be at the top tier of competition.

Marioneta

Maybe I forget about special deck builds, but most of the infinite loops that players create pretend to make direct damage or cast creatures/tokens until strength is enough to kill the opponent. Could be possible to restart the timer when one of the next conditions is met:

- Opponent life reduce.

- A creature/token strength increases and the total creatures strength is lower than opponent life.

Restarting the timer with this conditions probably will leave the well constructed loop decks continue working while end with the AI unintentional loops (Siren's Ruse+ original Naru Meha, 2 Rishkar's Expertise+ Vivid Revival...) that are the ones that players really want to solve. The timer should be reasonable too (starting with 60 seconds minimum) to give a chance when the random affects the cards order leaving creatures or card damage for the last positions of the deck. I'm not saying is a perfect solution (there are always exceptions) but could be a good starting point.

I agree with other players that 18 seconds is really restrictive. MTGPQ is growing in complexity and interactions with each new set, so putting a short timer will make more damage than improve the game. But I think this problem can be putted in standby increasing the timer to something absurd (30 min...) with a 3.3.1 patch while a final solution is reached between devs and community.

Avahad

Gem converters going off before you get a chance to do anything are definitely not going to count as you making a match are they?

Gunmix25

Thuran said:

Brigby said:

Gabrosin said:

starfall said:

Yeah, but I don't like all the +1/+1s. Adapt and Riot are only going to matter in Bronze Tier. They could have scaled those up so they matter to MTGPQ life totals instead of paper MTG ones.

Riot will just be haste, except when reinforcing your creature.  Domri giving out riot to any creature is going to have some nice synergies.  Still, it's true that +1/+1 is not a huge bump in PQ terms.

I'm more excited about spectacle.

I haven't looked through all the cards in RNA yet, but I hope that there's a card that passively grants Riot to creatures that enter the battlefield, because then that would be a huge boost to token generators. Combine that with Path of Discovery, and you've got a big creature fast! 

Path of discovery won't work with tokens, due to the 25 second timer....good example @Brigby

Any build using Trostani will be useless.  Love that card but the time it takes to resolve.  She'll cast once and my chord of calling card won't be allowed to resolve,  making it something akin to Expansion... I now have to wait a turn to cast a legitimately resolving card? Such issues can cost me a match in a PvP event in which I need that extra damage that turn for the win.  And I'm denied because of a timer that's trying to prevent loops and I wasn't casting any loops?

rafalele

Gunmix25 said:

Thuran said:

Brigby said:

Gabrosin said:

starfall said:

Yeah, but I don't like all the +1/+1s. Adapt and Riot are only going to matter in Bronze Tier. They could have scaled those up so they matter to MTGPQ life totals instead of paper MTG ones.

Riot will just be haste, except when reinforcing your creature.  Domri giving out riot to any creature is going to have some nice synergies.  Still, it's true that +1/+1 is not a huge bump in PQ terms.

I'm more excited about spectacle.

I haven't looked through all the cards in RNA yet, but I hope that there's a card that passively grants Riot to creatures that enter the battlefield, because then that would be a huge boost to token generators. Combine that with Path of Discovery, and you've got a big creature fast! 

Path of discovery won't work with tokens, due to the 25 second timer....good example @Brigby

Any build using Trostani will be useless.  Love that card but the time it takes to resolve.  She'll cast once and my chord of calling card won't be allowed to resolve,  making it something akin to Expansion... I now have to wait a turn to cast a legitimately resolving card? Such issues can cost me a match in a PvP event in which I need that extra damage that turn for the win.  And I'm denied because of a timer that's trying to prevent loops and I wasn't casting any loops?

Do not forget speed objectives.

Szamsziel

I really hate the idea of timer restricting possible moves. It resolve the problem of loops in a worst way.
Paper magic fix the infinite loops in a two way. First - by human to human interaction - which of course is not possible in our environment .
But there is another measure ensuring that the real loop is difficult to create - deck limitation itself. There is usually 60 cards in deck. If you attempt to draw on empty library - you loose. Why not implement similar limitation here? Let's chaise 80 cards deck. Show counter on screen and decrease it on draw. If it reaches 0 - end of game.
Other loops can be fixed as well - 
1) infinite tokens - if sum of power of yours creatures > ai life - skip to attack phase. The same goes for ai loops .
2) infinite changing board state without hitting opponent AND amount of cards to draw remains the same (scenario when graveyard or copy spells are heavily used so draw solution won't help). If amount of cards played > x and no life is lost and creatures power within x cards didn't increase - skip to attack phase.

KageTora

I was so excited for this update, I was really looking forward to it, and I sure was eager to devour the pre patch notes. We've been so long without any new content, without a single drop of new material, without a shred of teasing information... Most of us were parched for something new, dying to see new cards, new mechanics, and, most of all, new coalition events. And here it is, finally!

The key operative, here, is was. Past tense. Because, honestly, I can't even remember how I feel about the rest of the patch. I can't recall how the new PWs enticed me, how the guild mechanics made my mind flurry with potential card combinations and how to better take advantage of such mechanics. Hell, I can't even remember how let down, disappointed and utterly upset I was at the lack of a coalition event. Again. And I certainly cannot bring back that tingling sensation of when new content is about to be dropped! 

All because of the timer. That hit me (and many others I talk to) like a bomb. Not only the mechanic itself (which, don't fool yourselves, is horrible), but also the implications behind it.

"Why?"

That was - and still is - the only question echoing through my mind. Who thought this was a good idea? Who thought this was a problem? Who could possibly see this as a blessing for us, regular players, as opposed to a curse? And what problem were you even trying to address? Because, in all honesty, I can't see it. Any of it. 

So you mean to practically erase a complete playing style from your game? One that is present and valid in the original material you base your game on? You know, the original material that brought people into this game, to begin with? And all of that - why?! 

This is such a monumental, horribly though out mistake, for at least two different reasons.

First and foremost, combos and, to a certain extent loops, have been part of the game for a while now. Why is that? Because of the cards you introduce into the game. You make the moving parts that inhibit looping. Sure, some cards aren't necessarily inhibitors at face value, and with so many possible combinations, some unforseen things are bound to happen. But when you introduce cards such as Rishkar's Expertise or Blue Sun's Zenith, do you mean to tell me you didn't think they might enable loops? In essence, what you are doing is giving everyone the moving parts for such practices willingly, and then almost backdooring a mechanic that makes it impossible to utilize - instead of, y'know, nerfing/altering/never introducing these offenders to begin with...if that's what you truly wanted, that is. The fact that you still introduce these cards is very clear in saying that you did not think this to be an issue. 

Secondly, and definitely more importantly, this so called "fix" does nothing to directly address this problem (one you didn't seem to think was a problem at all before, as per the point above). What this "fix" does is completely raze any sort of combo, short, medium or long loop AND even certain PW/card combinations altogether. I mean, like mentioned above, can you even imagine playing G/W Huatli with path of discovery and march? Is that an infinitely loop? Is that a practice that needs to be abolished from use? Why? I know it's an extreme exaggeration, one that might even be of poor taste, but this is almost equivalent, metaphorically speaking, to trying to get rid of a weed infestation by dropping a small atomic bomb. Well, hey! We got rid of the weeds, didn't we? Yes, yes we did. Except we also butchered everything else in the process.

All of this to say that you try to fix an issue you created, by not being proactive and not actuality playing your game - or, God forbid, actually take advantage of your community, leaning and listening to them -, by destroying what a whole bunch of people, most of them your hard-core players, find the most fun part of the game. And that, my friends, is neither fair nor smart.

And then, there's the worst part. The true crux in all of this. The fact that you don't listen. The fact that you don't talk to us. You don't ask, you don't show, you don't tell. You assume you know better. But you don't. You never have and you never will. Your customers do - and that's what we are. We know what we want, what will keep us hooked, what will keep us engrossed in your product. All you can do is try to predict that, and you've all clearly shown that you're absolutely terrible at it and completely out of touch with your customer base.

For how long have we been asking for new coalition events? How many players and coalitions have left this empty shell of a game due to that? Do you have any idea? Because that's the one thing keeping most of us playing. I'm not talking about new players that pick this up, play it for a couple months, and drop it. I'm taking about those who have played it for years. Those that are quite literally this game's lifeblood. But you don't listen, do you? If you do, you're terrible at showing it.

And then this happens - we spend months begging for any kind of information regarding the new set, the new patch, and we get nothing. Zero. Zilch. Soon!

Until it's too late, am I right? Until you come here, drop this on us, and tell us it's too late to change it. "Sorry guys, deal with it"? I'm sorry to be this blunt, but you're terrible at your job (and I'm not including here, Brigby. You, at least, seem to try). 


I play this game every day. Multiple hours a day, even. It's one of a few things that keep me from going insane from my long hours working. I love my coalition and, sometimes, wake up earlier or go to bed later to give them my all, because they are the main reason I play this game, and cause you're bad at accommodating different timezones. This game has so much potential and, yet, you squander it. You squander the amazing community that was created around this game. All because you are not willing to talk, to engage, to listen. Because you know better. You think you do, at least. 

I've always heard that life is way too short, and I'm beginning to agree. Life is way too short for you to devote yourself to people and, in this case, companies that do not care about, nor listen, to you. And, perhaps, it's time to look for another company that actually does. Cause God knows there's thousands out there. 

BeyKlaw

I would prefer for cards which facilitate looping to be nerfed.   

For example, Rishkar's Expertise and Blue Sun's Zenith could have text added stating 'This card can only be cast a maximum of 5 times per turn.'  Still powerful, but not infinite.

wereotter

Re: the 25 second timer

I would have to time it out to see, but I’m pretty sure my red-blue wizards deck takes longer than that to resolve a blue sun’s zenith. I have to draw all the cards, the cards all gain their mana, then since all the cards in the deck cost 12 or less, they all get to cast. Plus Adeliz has her animation to buff all my creatures from every spell.

This isn’t a loop. Just one spell that can take time to fully resolve. 

I do appreciate the effort to put a cap on the loops, though! Nothing worse than having to force quit the game when you run into a deck the AI manages to loop into infinity. 

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Mburn7

starfall said:

wereotter said:

Re: the 25 second timer

I would have to time it out to see, but I’m pretty sure my red-blue wizards deck takes longer than that to resolve a blue sun’s zenith. I have to draw all the cards, the cards all gain their mana, then since all the cards in the deck cost 12 or less, they all get to cast. Plus Adeliz has her animation to buff all my creatures from every spell.

This isn’t a loop. Just one spell that can take time to fully resolve. 

I do appreciate the effort to put a cap on the loops, though! Nothing worse than having to force quit the game when you run into a deck the AI manages to loop into infinity. 

It's just occured to me that certain cards add animation time to an opponent's turn, and could possibly used to exploit the timer system: like Induced Amnesia?

Oooh, a new breed of Troll deck.  Now that's something fun to build around 

ZW2007-

A few things:
1. There was a thread started back in October about the infinite loop issue in the suggestions and feeback forum which saw no interaction from the devs and a single comment from Brigby. The thread eventually died because no one visits that sub-forum because the devs never engage us anyway. This is why you are seeing hostility currently.

2. Infinite combos in paper are perfectly legal and legitimate until WotC decides otherwise. If a player wants to build one and demonstrate the combo and allow it to continue until the match time runs out, the game is a draw and that's that. In PQ, there are no draws so if either the player or AI kick off a true infinite loop

3. Combos that loop a lot and for a very long time are not infinite. I have posted numerous times the difference between the two:

• An infinite loop is something like the AI casting Naru Meha (pre-nerf) with only Siren's Ruse in hand. The AI will continue to do this infinitely until the player quits, the game freezes, or their phone dies.
• A combo is something like the player casting Naru Meha (again, pre-nerf) with only Siren's Ruse in hand and Imminent Doom in play. The player can repeat this action until the AI is dead. A player would not repeat this action without Imminent Doom in play and also has the option not to; hence, not an infinite loop.
• This is an example of a case where they completely changed the function of one card in order to solve the short-comings of the AI.

Another example of an infinite loop that has since been fixed:

• Murder Investigation (and/or Ajani's Last Stand) + Divine Intervention + any token creator
• In this case, both the AI and player could get stuck in an infinite loop but the player had to have known that in the first place.
• This is an example of a case where they implemented a bugged card that should have never been able to create an infinite loop in the first place.

These are the ONLY kinds of things that they should have sought out to fix. Kiora playing Waterveil should not be nerfed because some players don't like to face it. They don't like to face it because it beats them and also takes a long time. They have the option to just quit if they think they will lose anyway and they have the option to sit it out and hope they get a chance to come back and win (which probably never happens). OmniHulk should not be nerfed because it takes a really long turn that will still kill you way faster than almost any other deck.

I think their solution was made with good intent but the execution was poor. The fix to the AI's Naru Meha infinite loop had long lasting ramifications on the game that led to copied cards made with full mana no longer casting on the turn they were made. It also had the side-effect of making Naru Meha mostly useless. The fix to Divine Intervention was simply a bug fix. The "fix" to "infinite loops" with the loop timer is no fix at all. It's a fundamental change to how the entire game is played.

In that very same thread I mentioned above (from 5 MONTHS AGO), I proposed a solution exactly two months ago:
If the exact same action (a card is cast) is repeated X times in a row with no damage being dealt, then it should stop the loop after Y iterations. 

Pre-nerf Naru/Ruse as an example:
AI casts Naru followed by Ruse. ID is not in play. AI continues to bounce Naru and create copies of Siren's Ruse. No damage is being dealt, the loop stops after the AI casts 3 copies of Siren's Ruse. If ID is in play, the AI just successfully pulled off the combo and killed you.

Perhaps this would just be too difficult to code since it would require the game to recognize not just 1 action looping infinitely but possibly 2, 3, or more.

I don't even know what I'm trying to accomplish here anymore, this thread is already a dead horse at this point. I'm just disappointed. I truly think this change, if implemented the way I believe it to work, will be the end of me playing this game. However, if "Card Visualizations" stopping the timer means a lot more than I'm giving it credit for, then it is possible this solution may not be so bad in the end. Time will tell. 

Unknown

This content has been removed.

nerdstrap

I wonder if anyone at WotC has seen this timer idea and signed off on it? I can’t imagine they would. MTGO and Arena both have infinite loops and no loop timers. The only game I can think of with a turn timer is Hearthstone. 

OmegaLolrus

Hrm... Been trying to think about how I feel about this. On the one hand, it definitely benefits me... I'm not sure if I'd still win against those decks, but I won't have to wait as long to lose. Though maybe I haven't seen as many of the truly hardcore combo decks.

On the other hand... How to say this. It's a bad spot to be in if you're a developer that can't take into account that there's always going to be percentage of the player population that will exploit (I mean this in its literal definition, not to imply that this is doing something wrong) and min/max their way to the best deck.

I don't know how good a solution this is, I'll have to actually play with it before I can make a decision... But it sounds like really short-term solution to (as I understand) a problem that has been around for a while?

If this is what we're going to be doing, have they considered making this as a toggle in game? I think it would make people happier in the short term. If you've got an amazing Infinite Loop deck, you can push it to the limit, though you may go up against something similar. If you don't want to sit through the Infinite Loop as it goes on and on, you can toggle the timer on, though you wouldn't be able to make use of it.

Really, the only long term solution that would be best for the game I could see would be to balance the cards and combos such that this is more manageable. Though the this "spell can only be cast X times per turn" idea is a really good one, for as easy to implement.

octal9

With respect to almost everything but the timer: I'm looking forward to a breath of fresh air in the game. A new coalition event would have sweetened the deal even further.

Now then, the timer. I'd first like to echo @Volrak because the build is out to the app vendors:

Suggestion: The timer should not apply to player turns.

All else being for naught, this is a quality suggestion.

That said, go get coffee, tea, a sandwich, whatever. This isn't a short post.

---------------------------------------------------------

Two things about this timer seem consistent through several communities full of players of all skill levels:

1. This design comes as a surprise, and
2. Players with the most positive opinion of the change are neutral at best about it ("let's wait and see").

Let's start with the first one.

This design decision comes as a surprise. It's no secret that the MTGPQ community at large wants more communication from the team - in fact, I'd wager this is their top concern. Yes, communicating with a gaming community - any gaming community - has its potential pitfalls ("Don't you all have phones?"), but there are significant benefits to doing so. Communication from a development team does the following, and more:

• helps players feel engaged about something they're passionate about,
• assures players they're being heard,
• aids player retention (see previous note - why stick around if you feel ignored?),
• increases confidence in the dev team

This design is a surprise because nobody saw it coming, and that happened because the communication wasn't there. I get that you maybe can't show us content because you have license concerns. But you absolutely can tease or communicate upcoming features - in fact, you have in the past! Unfortunately, in this case we had no idea you were trying to solve a loop issue and the chosen implementation feels like you're hitting a finishing nail with a very, very large sledgehammer. I can search the forums for loops and come up with plenty of complaints, but it turns out that the greater number of these results are addressing bugged interactions (Divine Visitation & Murder Investigation) or actual infinitely looping interactions (most well-known probably being Olivia, Mobilized for War + Locust God + Zendikar Resurgent), rather than Problematic Decks™ (Prism Array + converters possibly being the most egregious of these). So ...

Maybe this is just me, but part of the issue we players have right now is Oktagon's decision doesn't seem to address a problem. My first and biggest question is, "What problem are you solving?" Are you trying to prevent problematic decks? Are you "solving" the halting problem by kill9-ing the task? Are you future-proofing to combat bugged interaction loops from existing in the future? Are you preparing for true PvP? Without knowing the problem space it's hard to judge whether or not this is a sound decision based on its own merits, so I think defining the problem is our logical starting point.

Are you attempting to improve the new user experience? Because honestly, new players shouldn't be put up against this type of deck. That's a failure on the part of match-making, not player deck-building. And it seems that most player experience issues during gameplay aren't with loops, but with AI cascading their entire hand onto the field (and, of course, the perception that it does this more often than human players do, but that's a topic for approximately 498 different threads).

Are you planning True PvP? Communication on that front would turn what's viewed as neutral at best into a rationalized "okay that makes sense" reaction. E.g.: "A number of you want 'True PvP' and in MTGPQ's current state, that's not possible. Not everybody is playing on their toilet, so to enable you to face off against other players we found that real-time gameplay requires a real-time limit during a player's turn." A simple announcement of why a change is inbound increases player confidence in the team: "maybe these guys know what they're doing..."

Perhaps the problem you're trying to solve is more intangible.

Are you trying to promote skillful play? @Brigby's thread asking us what we consider skillful play in MTGPQ leads me to believe that this design choice arose as a way to promote skillful play - whatever the definition of that is. While I doubt the community will come up with a consensus definition, I think we'll agree that this is probably not the way to promote it.

When it comes to skillful play, PvE events define that by their deck and abilities on their own. PvE events, for example, present a problem for players to solve via their mastery over deckbuilding. "RotGP's last boss Nicol Bolas has a lot of creature removal, steals my creatures, and deals boatloads of damage to me with his ability when I have creatures on the field. How do I solve that? Maybe I should try a creatureless deck". These encounters then have objectives added to them. These objectives (I'll come back to that) help promote skillful play by placing constraints on the players' choices and forcing them to be more creative.

Right. Constraint on choice promotes creative deck-building. Does a constraint in the form of a realtime-based turn timer promote creativity, or does it stifle it?

Pv"P" events define skillful play more in the game management field. You may get an idea of what's coming in your matchup, but you don't know if that Dovin Baan is going to go for Nyx+Insidious Will cheese or if he's going to blow you out of the water with an Omniscience combo. So you use your game mastery to prepare for those things. Maybe you've seen the player before and you know their tendencies. Maybe you include a solution for the first while going full aggro to prevent the second. And during the match is another form of skill entirely - the type that involves board, hand, and ability management. Objectives for the match further promote skillful play, again by placing constraints on the players' choices. I've definitely had matches where weaknesses in my deck were exposed because I had to make a tradeoff between handling upcoming possibilities and hitting objectives.

The above digresses a bit obviously and probably belongs in the skillful play thread, but it's important discussion to have here as well because we just don't know if you're implementing this in an attempt to promote skillful play.

Perhaps, instead, you're implementing in an attempt to prevent the AI from looping. Okay - why? Who benefits from this, and how? There are so many questions to ask about this and so many other possibilities and so many questions that I actually need to cut to the chase and go with the most likely scenario:

Are you trying to prevent Problematic Decks? Let's assume you've implemented this to solve the problem where the AI is given a Problematic Deck to use. The human player has all interaction on their end halted while the AI goes through a seemingly endless Prism Array, Rishkar's Expertise, Seasons Past, Nissa's Renewal, Hour of Promise loop. Is a global timer the best solution for this problem? What other options were considered? We don't know because no attempt at discussion was made.

There are countless other solutions for Problematic Decks - nerfing cards (honestly Prism Array could probably use it), nerfing gameplay (cast counter - prevent any given card being cast > X times per turn by disabling future instances of it on draw), or even just giving a UI option for the player to halt future card casts on their turn (but don't put this in the menu, because it's bugged during animations and might soft-lock the game... ).

A turn timer addresses Problematic Decks, but it does so in a way that it will now feel bad to utilize combination decks. Combo decks are what a lot of people find fun in not just MTGPQ, but in trading card games in general - you take the card interactions and destroy your opponent thanks to Black Brie. Spending 300 crystals to get 25 un/common and the one rare you already had ugh whyyyy feels bad. Fighting in HoR for the given rewards feels bad. Spending 400 jewels and getting a duplicate mythic felt awful (and you fixed that, thank you!). Winning a match and getting a Server Error and the match counting as a loss for you feels bad. Winning every match and hitting every objective just to have multiple people go beyond max score because of yet another Server Error feels bad. Increasing the amount of feel bad is almost the absolute last thing MTGPQ needs and I'm sure players both veteran and new can attest to that. If you're trying to provide a solution to Problematic Decks, constraining in real-time feels like a tone-deaf way to do it. Use the correct tool - hit a finishing nail with a finishing hammer. Deal with the problematic cards on a case-by-case basis. Wide, game-changing decisions like this one make it feel like you're not just out of touch with the community, but with the game itself. It makes people question the view for the game. It makes people wonder about the game's roadmap and induces uncertainty in its future. I guarantee there are players that are wondering if anybody on the team actually plays the game.

If you're moving forward with a time-based turn timer, other changes must be introduced to bring fun and creativity back into the picture (increase max deck size to 12, increase creature slots on battlefield, introduce a "token only" creature slot, change the size/shape of the match field, etc - these are just examples, take all of them with a massive grain of salt). Otherwise in the game's proposed state, we're stuck with "hit the opponent in the face with three creatures and maybe spells and win." There might be skill involved there but is it fun? Does it feel good to chip away at your opponent's 400 health 12hp at a time? I don't think I can be convinced that the answer to the last one can ever be "yes." I swapped off a slow, cycling based ObNix deck against RotGP Nicol Bolas that took 30 minutes to pan out for exactly that reason. Winning slow against these highly tuned PvE encounters is dull. I felt way more skillful when I smacked him in the mouth with Elspeth in under 2m30s (in fact, I still link that video to people).

In the game's current state, a turn timer needs to be based off almost anything but real time. Heck, make milling a viable strategy by adding an event restriction like Enraged, that instead limits you to 5 copies of each card period. Add an objective for "Cast no more than 6 cards on any given turn" (please don't do that it's a bad objective and yet, it's still better than a universal timer :thinkspin:).

What are you trying to do? I can't say, for sure. But from here, it doesn't seem like the right way to go about doing it.

TL;DR: tldrs do a disservice, but if you insist: just read the bolded portions.

madwren

Bravo, Octal9, bravo.

WiLDRAGE

With normal animations, I timed Spell Swindle with Captain Lannery Storm in play with 2 other pirates.

It takes ~22 seconds to resolve on my Google Pixel 2XL.  I can't imagine how long it takes on a slower phone.