[suggestion] Multiplayer balancing

While I don't have massive experience yet, i've seen one thing in the few (100ish?) multiplayer battles i've had. There are some cards that allow you to practically play solitaire. Frost (encumber) movement denial and whirlwinds. Might be that balanced teams with decent cards CAN have a slight chance against such teams, but basically the only way to fight them is by using the same tactics yourself. Atleast with my mediocre cardpool and a balanced (1 of each class), I rate my chances to beat such a deck at a whopping 5%, if that. One lucky whirlwind or a well placed winds of war will most likely win the day.

Movement denial and ground effects seem to be the way to go, I would start with reducing the range of the extremely powerful frost effects and the "whirl" effects. On the other end of the spectrum would be the high hitting warrior/priest types which would demolish if there were no movement denial, but atleast those can be countered with a balanced setup.

A balanced team should have a decent chance versus anything, gimmicks (most 3 class builds, or even more likely 2 of the same class + one priest casting buffs in this case) should have hard counters which balanced teams do not have.

So as a suggestion for balance: less onehitting power on melee (for example all out attack, what was somebody thinking?), more drawbacks on priest buffs (the damage is negilible for the effect) and way less range on movement denial and inducing cards (frost, whirls). I do realize gimmicks will always come and go and true balance in an ever changing (cards come and go), but the only way to keep some semblance of balance is to cull down the dominant archetypes. Both teams should, in most cases, atleast feel like they have a shot at winning.

 

Interesting that you feel this way. I kept getting stomped with a balanced deck so I picked up the Elven magic deck so I could have more range and maneuverability. With some smart play (and avoiding all dice I possibly can!) I've been able to do decently. Now in the higher rankings the top meta seems to be the double priest empowering a warrior (though with the right cards I've seen the balanced deck do it as well.

I play the movement denial stuff, and was even able to have found one of the cold/encumber items which I was able to put into the deck, which is otherwise still pretty stock aside from some extra acid sprays. The empowered warrior decks though, walk right through me. The card drawing and healing combination lets the warrior come in unscathed with 3/4 movement cards a round. If I'm not lucky enough to have them fully encumbered (and sometimes even if I do!) then it can just waltz in and destroy me. My deck, or at least me playing it, was intended to stop the uber warrior decks, yet I see no way to stop this with my, or any other decks without some major card drawing luck and/or bad play on their part.

I'm not worried about it quite yet though. I know I'm very behind in the card acquisition having not even finished the campaign yet and it's still what I would consider early in the multiplayer meta, which will boil down to two or three top decks anyway. I just don't currently see a way of stopping the empowered warrior decks.

 

I like this thread so far discussing multiplayer balance is always very interesting. I've played quite a few games and recently most of my matchups are against double buffing priests and a mobility warrior or some kind of mage lockdown. Both of these decks are quite strong but they are not without their counters. I recommend bringing a lot of purges, this is one of the best offensive and defensive cards in the game at the moment. Stripping all of the buffs off of the lone warrior facing you will make him a lot less scary and give your balance team time to destroy him (can even remove invulnerability). Against cold based decks purge comes in handy again as you can remove the encumber and continue your advancing.

From what I've seen cleric is the real powerhouse of ensuring you can deal with a wide variety of decks so make sure to pack some purges and maybe a cleanse or two if you're worried about mages.

 

Yeah, the problem "might" be with clerics being the true powerhouse, or let's say build enabler here. In my 100ish games i've had about 20 games where i feel like no matter what I have in hand I could have done anything to prevent loss. I got decent buffs on my cleric, good strikes on my warrior, but poor cards for my wizard, compared. Low amount of move denial and zero enemy whirls. Rating is about 1200. I do not want to play (or play against) solitaire decks where the outcome is defined by getting a single huge hit with a warrior or a mages whirlwind. I prefer the tight back and forth battles, which , i've had a lot of, just not against the builds I mentioned. I suppose the support priests do play a key role in these decks, max number of leadership, buffs and purges to compliment the aforementioned warrior devastators or movedenialers.

Also, in my opinion, a game where you feel you are getting stomped playing balanced decks is .. very poorly balanced

 

Balanced isn't really the right term here, the term you want is 'Jack of all Trades'. With that term comes the valid baggage of 'Master of none'. It is clear to me that a very focused deck is going to beat a generalist or 'jack of all trades deck' most of the time, that is their job. They are designed to do one job really well with almost reckless abandon. They are design to beat decks that don't do that job as well as them.

Instead what you want is either something designed to completely invalidate what they are good at, or something that exploits their weaknesses.

The dual cleric warrior builds know that movement is their main weakness, so they build with heaps of move cards to make sure they can close the distance. They also know that high damage is their strength, and they are often light on defences. Against this build your strengths are ranged damage (spears and magic), purges, encumberment (targeted and area), enemy movement (knock backs and slides), and free moment (through attacks with movement or cantrip moves).

Your goal is to kill the warrior before he can do too much damage then turn your focus to his clerics. Do not advance let him come to you, make sure you've got some form of movment whenever he gets into range, either moving away (and attacking hopefully) or knocking him back at least 2 squares. If you know which character he is targeting make sure to play as many of their cards as possible before they die, focusing on damage or reducing damage. Also make sure to purge him if he has a lot of buffs. If your draw is okay you should be able to kill him in a round or two and he shouldn't be able to do any more than a step attack or two before dying.

Well I hope this advice is useful GL.

 

I'm not really looking for advice to beat a deck type, I play to have enjoyable games. You say focused, I say one trick ponies. In a multiplayer game you cannot dish the "they are designed to do one job really well" argument like that. If you are implying the jack of all trade deck are SUPPOSED to lose to focused decks, you have no idea of multiplayer balance Trust me, the last thing the dev's want are frustrated players facing solitaire decks, this is why I posted in the first place.

In most (card based) games balance works in mysterious ways, but usually a generalized deck should stand at a decent chance versus anything when played correctly. Focused decks should have strengths against some decks, weaknesses against some. Card hunter is in development, so why not throw in the ideas to balance the teams or cards so we can all have an enjoyable experience. I've lost plenty of games that I enjoyed a lot and won several that I didnt enjoy at all. Player dependant also, of course, but cards do play a big role in the tactics used aswell.

 

Okay I understand your point. I guess my main comment then is that I haven't yet faced a deck that I made me feel like there was nothing I could do. Against some if I'd used one card or another sooner I think I could have won. Against others I felt that if I kept a hold of my movement cards for longer I could have countered their plans as well. And in other cases I've realised a weakness of my build and took pains to address it.

As far as card balance goes I think it's a bit to soon to be saying that anything is out and out overpowered, though I am keeping a close eye on http://wiki.cardhuntria.com/wiki/Cards/All_Out_Attack, http://wiki.cardhuntria.com/wiki/Cards/Martyr_Blessing and several high damage single target melee attacks.

As far as your claims of multi-player balance go I think that 'one trick ponies' should do very well against any deck that doesn't have either way to exploit their weakness of diminish their strengths. A deck that just does it's own thing and ignores them will lose. A good generalist build should be able to do this if they have the right counters, and I've mentioned what some of these are. However, if players do not put a few of these counters into their decks and do not adjust their play style to suit the deck they are against then they can expect to lose, and lose quickly. To boil it down there are a wealth of generalist decks, but the good generalist decks are not those that have the same basic approach every match but those that are the most adaptable. The ones that are able to adjust to suit the deck they are against will be the ones that do well in the long term.

 

Don't know if its at "high" rating games only that you face the solitaire decks, I know that my deck, especially my wizard with 60 %common, 30% uncommon items has no place being in the top 20 leaderboards but there I am with the low amount of players available. If i face a high rated team with full wizards or 2 wizards + priest, knowing i dont have any whirlwinds and good freezes/fireballs on my wizard myself, I know I will lose 95% of the time. Maybe it gets better when I get "the trick", even if its on just one guy, I improve my odds a lot. Thing is, I feel I absolutely need the trick to compete, both versus wizard heavy and warrior heavy teams, hence the whole thread.

 

I'm at about the same rating as you 1150-1250 and have faced the decks you mention multiple times and from different players, especially cleric/warrior recently. From what you say it might just be a matter not having access to the right items at the moment, I dunno but good luck on your chests and shops. Also i could just be good draws from your opponents plus bad draws from you.

 

*Ahem* Hi, I thought I might weigh in on the topic.

I've played every combination of class and race. I've played a few games and I can will some certainty and credibility say MP is balanced.

On a personal note, I have not played a Priest in ranked MP in... over a month. Which isn't to say they aren't good. I just do not particularly favor the class. My current built (a complete item list) can be found here: http://www.cardhunter.com/forum/threads/mp-builds.1773/ Now, that being said, I've seen others do wonderful things with every combination of class and race. There is no deck type that trumps all, and wins relay mainly on two things: luck, and experience.

Ps: I've played using 2 characters against players rated over 1000, and won... So, again experience and luck take you a long way.

 

I suppose card pool WILL help, I am running mostly commons and uncommons with the exception of weapons. Might be I have been unlucky facing the same teams over and over again, with masses of leadership for cycling, unholy power, frost and whirlwinds. I've lost a teammember in the first round several times, staying out of line of sight actively several times. And most importantly, i've felt I can do nothing at all to prevent it. Not a thing. Whirl some enemy, freeze it, kill. Still learning the cards, sure, but It cant hurt to post impressions, can it?

Gotta ask you one thing, would you consider playing several different decks without telekinesis/freeze type cards? whirlwind enemies? I would not, looking at their power. If I had any, that is

 

While a card pool does help. It's not a necessity, nor are rare cards. Although, as you supposed, they "WILL help."

I would, and have played decks in ranked without any, "telekinesis/freeze type cards." Additionally, I would play anyone around 1000 or less rank, with 2 characters, or without anything above an uncommon, in an unranked match any time. And although I may not win; I will undoubtedly make you work for your victory (although, I would bet on me wining ) .

 

Not sure I agree with this. Certainly luck plays a large roll. God knows if dice rolls come into play they sure as heck always seem to go against me. Drawing I haven't had much of an issue with aside from a game here or there that I couldn't draw additional movement cards (in a high mobility deck) until suddenly that's all I draw for two rounds which caused me to lose.

I think there is a possibility for there to be a combination to gain a significant advantage against all other decks. The card drawing of Martyr Blessing and Unholy Energy and/or Accelerated Thought (both of which come from Gloomthirst BTW). That in itself is (at least) a two card advantage for a few turns, which is huge in a game where the first person to run out of cards is a sitting duck. So the kill the warrior quickly tactic breaks down when they can get 2+ move cards and 2+ step cards per turn pretty easily without any further support. Even when encumbered (due to the one staff I have with those spells) they can outmaneuver me.

I've had plenty of games where I knew the cards I had were nowhere near what I needed to even compete with the cards of my opponent. My deck, even well played, just doesn't have the time (due to the capture and hold nature) to wait out those sorts of effects and can't (even as a high mobility elf deck) stay away from even a dwarf warrior with that sort of card drawing ability. That is even more true when it's backed by further healing.

Now I've never even seen a purge card, so yes that would be useful. But then I'd also have to draw it, not to mention having a priest in my party. I think it is highly likely that there will be a single deck that has an advantage over all and I can't see it realistically not being a high card advantage deck. Time will tell, but I have a feeling we'll be seeing changes to such high card advantage tactics.

 

Not sure where you are getting this. Focused decks are often designed to destroy jack of all trade decks. In a JoAT decks you have a much higher chance of drawing cards that aren't going to help you against the deck you are playing. Sure those 3 cleanse cards may be helpful against mages, but useless against the all warrior decks. Oh and those 3 cleanse cards likely aren't enough to deal with a focused terrain manipulation setup. Sure you'll likely have some healing, but enough to deal with my long range, mobile mage decks where your warrior is next to useless? (I've had lots of games where my opponent says "Does my warrior actually get to play an attack??! .. guess not.") I don't see how a JoAT deck can compete since if you can do something decently, I can do it much better by focusing on it and if you can't stop that, multiple times, I win. In my opinion, focused decks generally win if you play them to their strengths, JoAT decks can only hope to draw the right cards for the situation and hope they can pull something to counter the focused deck's win strategy.

And they do. With larger deck sizes and restrictions decks don't generally take the form of "one trick pony" decks and end up being more, 2-3 viable tactics decks. Certainly each deck with have strengths and weaknesses vs other deck types, but that doesn't mean those weaknesses are such that the deck will lose to another deck type, but more of a "Should I get a bad draw, X deck type may be able to take advantage of Y tactic to cause me a lot of pain."

Certainly on both cases. I'm glad you posted because I think it's an important discussion to have -- and something to keep an eye on as additional tactics emerge. Now if you are suggesting that things should change so a JoAT deck should have a decent chance against any other setup, I think you're a bit off the mark for this sort of game.

 

So in the end it becomes just another rock, paper scissors? I personally don't find RPS mechanics too deep

 

Actually I think it will level out to be more of a situation where people play one of two to three deck types, where each player will have a slight variation of those types due to preference, available gear etc. Each type will have main tactic and some utility/panic type cards for dealing with each of the deck types, including mirror matches. Then it will come down to draws and outplaying your opponent.

All other things equal, luck and experience will carry you through... unless you want to play another deck type, then best of luck to you since the known "viable" decks have already evolved out of the hundreds of thousands of community matches. Then come the card expansions to muck everything up!

 

If you already think "only" three deck types will be sort of viable, dont you see the need to diversify? In my eyes, MOST deck types should be somewhat viable. Hell, maybe they even are for all I know. I atleast enjoy diversity a lot. I do also know that there are a lot of people that prefer wiki and "generally approved" decks. My original point still being that I find "game ending" cards a bit silly, no single card or even two should decide the outcome outright

 

I think it's almost unavoidable. It's an evolutionary process that will lead to finding the most efficient cards and combinations of card which give the highest chance of winning. I'd love to see more diversity. Without a game mechanic to continually change the deck building environment, emergence of the top decks will happen.

All (okay most somewhat rational) decks are "somewhat viable" in that, given enough luck and strong play or mistakes by the opponent, CAN win... It's just very unlikely when pitted against the top decks. I also enjoy diversity, but that's not the nature of competition. You don't see a bunch of different types of car configurations running in F1 races or wildly different strategies/formations in pro sports. And for good reason. It's not because they dislike diversity, it's because they use what has been time tested to work. Sure, every now and again someone will come up with a plan that will take them by surprise, but that will only work until people realize how to play against it, or make a small item adjustment to deal with it. It will be more about knowing what the other deck can do and playing accordingly than it will be a need for other cards.

Don't think such a card exists. Give one player an advantage? Sure, but nothing that can't be overcome.

 

The day I start thinking of a card game as sport is the day I'll stop playing them, guess that is where our opinions differ. And i've played a card game that is rather balanced with thousands of viable decks and cards for 15 years running (not magic, a 5 player card game called V:tes). Somewhat competitively aswell, I do enjoy winning but not just for the sake of winning. My "quest" for diversity stems from there I suppose, but I don't think I am entirely alone, even if I would be a minority. I just would not play a game with a low amount of options to remain competitive. Not saying card hunter is one, remains to be seen

Why do I care? because I see a lot of potential in the game and to me atleast, balance and versatility make me want to play and pay for a game for 15+ years.

I've had several games decided with a single mass movement twister(random, targeted, whichever). Those are the cards I am talking about. Might be random, but position is key and mass position changers
can end a game then and there. Countered by? more mass position changers as far as I see.

 

Perhaps. Not sure I see them as a true sport, but there are many similarities that one can draw parallels from one to the other.

Certainly, in a 5 player game there are many more available tactics, even in games like MTG. I do wonder, though, if that's just due to the exponential complexity of the multiple variables that exist in that format and thus it will just take much longer to evolve the top few strategies.

Or blocks, or a team that can survive on their own when isolated (generally warriors), or enemy hand manipulation, or likely other ways as well. The whirlwind enemies can be useful if held and used at the right time, but they are not the end all. For instance, against my deck, I may lose a wizard should they get placed near the enemy warrior, but they will likely lose at least one character because they are now in LOS of my other wizards.