Mainloop25 said: One thing they can do is reverse the decision to make the AI avoid match-5's.
Thuran said: And make the AI cycle, and NEVER kill it's own creatures. Not sure if making it always prioritise the card which requires the least mana to cast next would be good, but it needs better priorities.
Kinesia said: Matchups by rough PW level are quite pointless.
Kinesia said: Matchups by rough PW level are quite pointless. A rating system of some sort would help a lot, it's not like there isn't already data collected on players.Simple things though, instead of level match roughly on "number of mythics/MPs in deck", it's more accurate than PW level.I find it hilarious that some people are saying elsewhere "let us use all our cards!" when they really mean "let us use just our best 10 cards for everything!".I _Want_ variety. Forcing limits of 1 MP per deck and 2 Mythics per deck would absolutely annoy a heap of people, but it would encourage them to look at the rest of their collection and possibly make something new and different for the very first time this year.
Ohboy said: We should all have individual internal scores and rankings.If I'm winning so much I'm placed in the top percentiles, I should be pit against the players whose decks win against other players in the top percentiles.
Yes exactly what I was saying.
I would also like to point out that this would have been a much better solution to the mass austerity package from earlier this year. If the problem is that the rich get richer and create a barrier for newer players, perhaps newer players shouldn't be pitted against myself or OhBoy? Now it doesn't really matter if my collection is better.
You could do the same thing for coalitions where we face off in different brackets so that the same few don't just always win and encourage players from coalition hoping to the top. Give winners of all tiers truly worthwhile prizes so that once they reach higher brackets they have the capacity to compete.
Its just a better way... players will pay money for strong cards if they will have a high chance of leveraging them into winning more strong cards. If the prizes are boring and similar regardless of rank... well I haven't spent a dime since austerity. And I don't think I am the only one.
TLDR: An ELO system would be a better system of fixing skill and resource gaps than austerity, while driving more revenue imho.
Kinesia said:...Perhaps the distinction can be a ranked matching that the rewards are from, but a _non_ reward option where you can pick the rough level of your opponent or put in other criteria like say "I want to test this deck against a level 40 Elspeth" and have it pick a deck not just out of the people _in_ training grounds but out of any decks anyone has saved that match the other requirments. Since it's not reward based it doesn't hurt anything else.
Kinesia said:...Perhaps the distinction can be a ranked matching that the rewards are from, but a _non_ reward option where you can pick the rough level of your opponent or put in other criteria like say "I want to test this deck against a level 40 Elspeth" and have it pick a deck not just out of the people _in_ training grounds but out of any decks anyone has saved that match the other requirments. Since it's not reward based it doesn't hurt anything else. What if you could select a difficulty and get different amounts of runes per battle based on your choice.
Kinesia said: majincob said: Kinesia said:...Perhaps the distinction can be a ranked matching that the rewards are from, but a _non_ reward option where you can pick the rough level of your opponent or put in other criteria like say "I want to test this deck against a level 40 Elspeth" and have it pick a deck not just out of the people _in_ training grounds but out of any decks anyone has saved that match the other requirments. Since it's not reward based it doesn't hurt anything else. What if you could select a difficulty and get different amounts of runes per battle based on your choice. That could be good. I wouldn't mind a huge range of options though, pick the potential level range of the enemy, the possible colours, all kinds of stuff.It'd be nice to go "I want to fight a level 60 Koth", (except I wouldn't do that!), but the defaults should be "someone of your rough skill level with roughly the same PW level", since that will _probably_ not be matchable I'm not sure how you try and prioritise things...
Great idea @majincob.
I agree that the ELO system should be for competitive play and that we should have loads of options in which to deck test. How many people would love a mirror-match mode of TG? Or the ability to test other decks or those of friends/coalition mates.