This Has Been On My Mind a Long Time: Extra Swaps

jtwood

With PvP here, I think I need to let out the quiet part that I’ve been keeping inside for a while now:

Match-5s should not give extra swaps
and
Extra swaps should only come from card/PW effects

Extra swaps are such a huge swing in a game. They shouldn’t be doled out by something as random as a match of 5 gems. They need to be earned the same as extra turns in paper - the hard way.

Against the AI, this was an equal trait for all players, so I kept my mouth shut. But now that PvP is here, we are going to see so many feelbad situations from a random outcome that turns a game on a dime. Removing this quality of the game will improve the user experience in the long run. 

I feel strongly about this and will also admit that my opinion doesn’t matter one lick. Feel free to disagree. Strongly. 

BongoTheGrey

I agree that it is an unfair advantage. There is enough RNG involved in the game already. I understand that since this is also a match 3 game there should be some kind of bonus  for achieving that but extra swaps are just too powerful on this game that they should be earned the hard way.

Maybe change the 5 match effect fore something more balanced so you can keep the match 3 game element without giving that player an unfair advantage. My approach would be an increase on the mana bonus of the color you get the 5 match. Could be something like +3 for 2 turns on that color. That +3 should add to all other mana bonus increases and not be affected  by mana bonus decreases. For example Dryad of the Ilysian Grove makes all your mana bonuses +3 at the beginning of your turn. If you make a 5 match swap the +3 from your 5 match should add to the +3 of Dryad instead of being reset to the Dryad's +3 on all colors

Tremayne

Interesting issue you bring up @jtwood. 

I must admit that I have not fully considered this issue, but my immediate thoughts are. Extra swaps are a powerful feature, no question about it.
The possibility of exploiting match-5 on the table are a funny and engaging element of matching gems in MTGPQ (and as far as I know though not a unique thing, it is a little used functionality in match-5).
Match-5 is mainly annoying when Greg exploits match-5’s as part of cascades. Let me elaborate, if during my turn, I make a match which leaves a match-5 on the table for Greg, that is bad play on my part. However, when a match-5 occurs as part of Greg’s cascade, be that a spell, support or lame match-3, which turns into a lot more, then the frustration and annoyance goes through the roof. However, no matter how the huge discrepancy in mana occurs (my 15 mana to Greg’s 100 mana) then the randomness kills the fun.

So capping the amount of mana you can get during a turn could be a completely different solution to the same problem. Note there is no capping on loyalty!

As mentioned above this is just stray thoughts, but I’ll definitely think more on this. Thanks @jtwood for raising an interesting idea. 

bk1234

So what should Match-5’s do as an alternative? 

BongoTheGrey

On my previous post my alternative was that match 5's should increase the mana bonuses on the matched 5 color for a number of turns. My idea was +3 on that color for 2 turns but the increase and duration could be different.

By doing that you still get a considerable bonus from performing a match 5 but it is a lot more balanced than taking extra turns.

Here is a video of something that happened to me a couple of weeks ago. I took 5 extra turns by performing 5 match 5 swaps on my first turn. Imagine how frustrating it would have been if that happened during a real time PvP match. If I had just got a nice mana boost that rewarded me for the first 5 match swap and then pass the turn to my opponent I would still had an advantage but not an unfair one.

https://imgur.com/gallery/y23gAZf

andrewvanmarle

Honestly, this is the reason why tacking on PVP isn't good for certain games:

At first it is PVE with the player experience skewed toward the player.
And -then- you add pvp which will  immediatly require "retuning"the game because the pvp experience is frustrating.

I do disagree though: a player should be able to do anything greg can do. That way the experience is comparable regardless of the match being pve or pvp.

I'd point my finger towards mechanics that greg cant use....

I predict this though:

Since human players are definitly going to win less and lose more when playing pvp, this going to call for one nerf afer another because players suddenly start losing 50% of the time (on average)

BongoTheGrey

But the idea is to change the match 5 bonus from giving you an extra turn to something else on every format and event for everyone including Greg. 

madwren

I don't mind the extra swap, but I wish that it was limited to 1 per turn unless the limit is increased by the use of specific cards. 

Bil

A 5-match could Also convert 3 gems into it's color. That would still be quite an exciting bonus without being too punishing for the oponent.

Mburn7

I'm a bit conflicted about this.

On one hand, a match-3 game is inherently based on RNG, and getting a huge bonus for a match-5 is very common in the genre (mostly because it is super rare).  And there is a lot of skill involved in making sure your opponents don't get one too (also a lot of luck involved obviously).

On the other hand, if you're going to do competitive PvP than you really should make it as much about skill as possible.  And there is nothing more annoying than whiffing on a gem conversion spell and giving your opponent 3 free swaps worth of matches.

I guess the real question is, how much luck do you want in your match-3 game in pvp?  And how much should the game reward that luck?

I like @Bil 's suggestion to convert gems (or maybe just give bonus mana) as something that's powerful, but not insane.  The other suggestions to increase a mana bonus are cool, but make everything a lot more complicated and prone to issue too.

jtwood

bken1234 said:

So what should Match-5’s do as an alternative? 

Something that isn't so game-warping

But also: Why does a match-5 need to do anything fancy? It's already a bonus because you're getting more mana than a match-4 or a match-3.

I say that more tongue-in-cheek than not. It isn't a bad thing for it to do something. But just because it has provided a bonus historically is not real rationale for providing a bonus in the future. That's just conditioning making us think we need a reward for it.

ambrosio191

Mburn7 said:

I'm a bit conflicted about this.

On one hand, a match-3 game is inherently based on RNG, and getting a huge bonus for a match-5 is very common in the genre (mostly because it is super rare).  And there is a lot of skill involved in making sure your opponents don't get one too (also a lot of luck involved obviously).

On the other hand, if you're going to do competitive PvP than you really should make it as much about skill as possible.  And there is nothing more annoying than whiffing on a gem conversion spell and giving your opponent 3 free swaps worth of matches.

I guess the real question is, how much luck do you want in your match-3 game in pvp?  And how much should the game reward that luck?

I like @Bil 's suggestion to convert gems (or maybe just give bonus mana) as something that's powerful, but not insane.  The other suggestions to increase a mana bonus are cool, but make everything a lot more complicated and prone to issue too.

Where is this competitive PvP?  From the announcement post:

Hello everyone, 

The moment you have all been waiting for is here, it’s happening! Are you ready to battle your mates in real-time? Are you ready to finally be able to prove yourself to your friends? 

Let’s give a warming welcome to this special feature, the Real-Time PvP! A new challenge mode where Greg is not allowed! There will be also no rewards involved, just pure joy!

There are no rewards in this PvP. It's intended as a fun feature among "friends (coalition members)" that we have requested for years. Do we really want to change a core feature of this game to accommodate a potential feel bad moment?  A moment that's supposed to be between friends and shouldnt harbor any hard feelings. It's a potential moment, that has no bearing on the entirety of the rest of the game, because there are no rewards.

jtwood said:

bken1234 said:

So what should Match-5’s do as an alternative? 

Something that isn't so game-warping

But also: Why does a match-5 need to do anything fancy? It's already a bonus because you're getting more mana than a match-4 or a match-3.

I say that more tongue-in-cheek than not. It isn't a bad thing for it to do something. But just because it has provided a bonus historically is not real rationale for providing a bonus in the future. That's just conditioning making us think we need a reward for it.

I would argue a completely for fun, rewardless aspect of this game is not rationale for changing core functions of the game.  Should we also remove all mana gained from cascades, and only award the intial 3-7 gem swap, because they are too powerful? They are mostly just RNG anyways. It's a real feel bad moment when Greg gets a lucky cascade and drops his hand on turn 1. Would also feel bad when a PvP opponent gets a lucky cascade that gives them 30 mana to cast Ruinous Ultimatum to swing the game in their favor. We have already had hundreds of threads about how unfair it is, and that was without PvP.

Scrounger

Really interesting topic. Thanks @jtwood for bringing it up. I agree. Here's why.

I definitely agree that an extra swap from a 5 match is extremely powerful. You not only get another swap, but you get another main phase, as it were, and that's huge too. That is a huge advantage. Massive. And it's primarily based on randomness.

In fact, you can demonstrate how powerful it is just by looking at the cards that grant extra swaps. Currently, there are 8 cards that do so. Only 1 is a rare (and this rare grants extra swaps to your opponent too). 6 are mythics. And one is a masterpiece. So it's a mythic to masterpiece level effect when it is not symmetrical. And that makes sense because it is akin to an extra turn in paper mtg, which is an extremely powerful and rare effect.

That's why I agree with you. And @BongoTheGrey's suggestions for other benefits that a match-5 could confer are interesting and well thought out too. I think I'd rather see a +2 bonus in the match-5 color for three turns, but that's the sort of detail that could be experimented with.

Extra turns should be harder to come by than simply making match-5's. The proof is in the rarity of the cards that grant this effect.

jtwood

ambrosio191 said:

Mburn7 said:

I'm a bit conflicted about this.

On one hand, a match-3 game is inherently based on RNG, and getting a huge bonus for a match-5 is very common in the genre (mostly because it is super rare).  And there is a lot of skill involved in making sure your opponents don't get one too (also a lot of luck involved obviously).

On the other hand, if you're going to do competitive PvP than you really should make it as much about skill as possible.  And there is nothing more annoying than whiffing on a gem conversion spell and giving your opponent 3 free swaps worth of matches.

I guess the real question is, how much luck do you want in your match-3 game in pvp?  And how much should the game reward that luck?

I like @Bil 's suggestion to convert gems (or maybe just give bonus mana) as something that's powerful, but not insane.  The other suggestions to increase a mana bonus are cool, but make everything a lot more complicated and prone to issue too.

Where is this competitive PvP? 

I think some expanded form of PvP will be here one day:

To start things off, it will be available inside coalitions only, between your teammates.

QuiksilverHg

I agree, wasn’t anything I had thought hard about for, just felt intrinsic to the game. Really not a necessary feature when you think about it though.

I like the idea of just an extra extra mana from the match or a color bonus for a few turns.

Mburn nailed it with pointing out how frustrating it can be to whiff on a color match and give the opponent extra turns. Many times in this game when effects that are supposed to help you end up helping the opponent when RNG goes bad. This extra match thing is just something that amplifies those effects in addition to the points everyone else has brought up

Volrak

jtwood said:

With PvP here, I think I need to let out the quiet part that I’ve been keeping inside for a while now:

Match-5s should not give extra swaps
and
Extra swaps should only come from card/PW effects

Extra swaps are such a huge swing in a game. They shouldn’t be doled out by something as random as a match of 5 gems. They need to be earned the same as extra turns in paper - the hard way.

Against the AI, this was an equal trait for all players, so I kept my mouth shut. But now that PvP is here, we are going to see so many feelbad situations from a random outcome that turns a game on a dime. Removing this quality of the game will improve the user experience in the long run. 

I feel strongly about this and will also admit that my opinion doesn’t matter one lick. Feel free to disagree. Strongly. 

I disagree.  I don't feel strongly about it, but there seem to be plenty of arguments on the side of disagree, for example:

• Without the swing caused by extra turns, one of the biggest frustrations in the game (large clusters of players on perfect scores) would be amplified that much more.
  
• Moving the extra turn mechanic exclusively into cards would worsen the divide between new players and veterans who have means to acquire new cards rapidly; this is another ongoing issue the game is trying to address, not make worse.
• Without the potential for super-lucky opponent turns, the difficulty of the game for veterans (already too easy the view of some), would be even easier.  A game with insufficient challenge factor loses a certain audience.
• The importance of match 5s adds significant (non-random) tactical depth to the game.  While randomness always plays a part in off-screen cascades, there is skill in choosing a match which minimise the odds for Greg and maximise them for yourself.  There is also skill in spotting available on-screen cascades into a match 5.
• The gem board is already underutilised in terms of its importance to tactical decisions in the game (with a few recent exceptions like landforming and mana field); this suggestion would make it more so.
• Extra turns from match 5s are part of the game's history, character, and charm.