4. I play A LOT, and grind A LOT, and am still missing so many of the amazing cards these super power decks use to get 100% on every event, and I still enjoy the game. Also, what is the secret to pulling MPs? I have been playing for two years, and have opened something like 4 million packs, still zero
babar3355 said: With Oktagon taking the helm we have seen some dramatic improvements to the game and a clear pivot in stance around the conductibility of the cards. I am really excited about the new direction of the game and wanted to take a moment to lay out a case for how the developers could (should) approach card balance. The last thing we want is a few dominant strategies making up the entirety of the meta-game for end game players.The current state of the game is that the cards have fixed stats and functionality and only extremely overpowered cards end up getting adjusted (nerfed). But why should this be the case going forward? Unlike paper MTG, D3/Oktagon can access card usage statistics and use this information to constantly make small tweaks to the card pool in order to create a continually shifting meta that always encourages new ideas and different deck construction. Consider other successful games like WoW or DOTA. They frequently make tweaks to abilities, stat gains, etc which causes the game to constantly evolve and have a different look and feel.Rather than engaging in debates over whether Omniscience deserves a nerf the community would have a clear expectation that all cards will be constantly monitored and slightly adjusted in order to have a fresh and challenging game-state. It is one thing for the company to sell Baral and then nerf him as the only nerfed card in 2017. It is a different thing if your expectation is that the card will be similar in design but will be tweaked up or down based on realized strength in the meta-game. You could argue that people might not want to purchase such a fluctuating card, but look at it form the other perspective. Might you have bought Depala, Mirrorwing Dragon, Terretorial Gorger, etc if you knew they would likely get buffed in the future?Some might see this being a very time consuming task, but I suspect you could use machine learning or even a basic algorithm to make suggested tweaks to the card pool.Let me know your thoughts!
TheF3C3SK1ng said: Nice post, and I totally agree.A few things.1. Are you telling me Mirrorwing was actually WORSE than it is now? I didn't get it until way late, so I guess I missed the pre-buff version.2. Baral was not 'nerfed' just FIXED. If one card plus a bunch of dumb uncommons and commons is enough to make a deck go full on looping for 20+ minutes then that card is broken, not overpowered. IF, on the other hand, that dumb card had required multiple rares and another mythic to go full on loop mode, then yes, it should have been left alone. As it was, it was just stupid, and poorly thought out. (sorry to bring this up, but so many people are sore about buying a broken card, but I mean, it was broken, not powerful3. I am really curious whats going to happen over the next few months, as the people who have amassed NEARLY every amazing card, are going to just add to their already ridiculous collections. Your solution may be the only way to keep the game from turning into a frustrating nightmare.4. I play A LOT, and grind A LOT, and am still missing so many of the amazing cards these super power decks use to get 100% on every event, and I still enjoy the game. Also, what is the secret to pulling MPs? I have been playing for two years, and have opened something like 4 million packs, still zero
andrewvanmarle said: Oh please no!!and I mean this in the nicest way possible, babar, but that is a really really bad idea.sure tweaking cards that have unexpected consequences on the meta can be tweaked (as little as possible though) but we should have a constantly shifting meta where every time something new is intro duced you get this loooong list of cards that get this or that tweaked.You see it with other games (like faeria recently) where the devs think a card is played too much and so they chop off it's'head. an example in this game could be shrine, drownyard and my face piramid of pantheon. Those cards end up in 80% of my decks, but is that a reason to tweak m?Balancing is a slippery slope, and i think the devs should tread very very carefully, both in the number of tweaks and the severity of them.your idea opens the door to a bunch of tweaks each month (or something similar)I think the brunt on the work should be before the cards are released, and post release balancing should only be done to plug holes.
grovercleveland said: andrewvanmarle said: No that is exactly what i mean, if shrine is a dominant manafixer, that doesnt mean that it is overpowered, it means that it is the best option out there. Isn't it a bit dull having a best option out there that you always use? I like it when there are 4 or 5 best options out there and I pick the one which is appropriate for the deck I'm building at the time. That's not to say that a grand effort should be made to have all mana accelerators be on exactly the same power level, just that a flatter power level across the cards makes everyone's life more fun. Cards like Sunscorched Desert are a waste of everyone's time.
andrewvanmarle said: No that is exactly what i mean, if shrine is a dominant manafixer, that doesnt mean that it is overpowered, it means that it is the best option out there.
andrewvanmarle said: It would be if we didn't get a set of new cards every so often and we ddnt have the legacy standard system.Tweaking cards to simulate content is a lazy and cheap option. I'd'rather have a new set.It's a fixed given that in CCG's cards aren't all of the same power/desirability. it'd make the game ultimatly boring to attempt to get all cards on the same level. A certain amount of difference makes the game interesting, too much will make the game boring again. We do need less interesting cards to make the game as a whole more interesting.There are a few cards that are patently useless like Aven Mind censor and Compelling argument that could do with a reevaluation, but most cards are good as they are.please no "regular "tweaking to shake things up", new content shakes things up.
I think it is a really short-sighted approach to not seek to balance cards that are clearly dominating the meta game and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
Szamsziel said: 25 supports on board? Even if just servos with +25 you do need mana anymore.. Or I miss something