[Suggestion] Different victory square configurations

It would be nice to have the option to play a map with or without victory squares. Personally, I don't like them much. It feels like the whole game revolves around who can rush to the center first and camp the best. It feels like warriors, and all dwarves, are favored because of this. It doesn't seem to matter that I'm playing better than my opponent it terms of movement, staying alive, playing the right cards at the right time, etc....because they can win just by camping the middle of the board. I'm currently playing a team of elves, which I like very much so far, but I can't do much in terms of just rushing in and camping. Again, it feels like the higher health characters are favored because of this.

Anyone agree or no?

 

I'd disagree. Victory squares keep the game from dragging on and on for a number of reasons.

I also play 3 wizards in pvp and find a few tactics depending on if I can get to and hold the middle or if I have to stop my enemy from standing on the victory squares. There are plenty of spells (and attacks) that knock people back out of the squares or make terrain so you really don't want to stand on them for very long. Of course spells like whirlwind and such are also very helpful.

Since dwarves are slower, they can have a hard time even GETTING to the center. I often box out dwarf warriors and only have to worry about the other two.

 

Yup. But you don't always get those spell cards when needed, whereas a tank always gets what they need because all they really need is move cards, which you always get. Doesn't seem very fair.

As for the attacks that knock back, not everyone uses those cards. I don't. They don't fit with my build.

Not really. They have quite a few cards that help them move, not to mention other ally move cards. And their high HP + armor doesn't help to be combative against them.

 

If a tank is only getting move cards, then why are you worried about them? Just go stand on the victory squares!

Then what about terrain spells like acid spray, which like the knockback attacks also negates the tanks movement, not to mention removes their armor and deters them from standing on the victory squares?

Yes, really. They can have a hard time getting to the center. I love seeing dwarf warriors because I can generally lock them out and just worry about the other two. Sure, there are cards that help them (as there are for everything) but they also have to draw them or they move 2 squares. One acid spray in front of them and it takes them a few rounds to even get through that.

If you're build is all about damage and/or you aren't willing to adapt it that doesn't make the situation unfair or require fixing. It's just you being inflexible and expecting what you think is best to work every time, and that's just not going to happen.

Victory squares are a well used mechanic in many games that remove situations from that game that are unfun. You don't want to be constantly kited by mages forever, nor do you want to have to chase someone down during a stale mate until someone quits. Having to adapt and deal with various tactics to hold the center, or stop your opponent from holding it is often what tactics games are about.

 

No, I meant that they always get at least one move card, possibly more, not that move cards are all they get. I'm saying that they're guaranteed at least part of what they need to tank(move cards, the other being armor), whereas you're not guaranteed to get the terrain/knock back cards you need to combat them tanking.

I mentioned this above - yeah, those cards work great, if you get them when you need them. My point is that tanks always get the cards they need to tank, whereas combators don't always get the cards they need to combat the tanks. Not to mention, the combators can't only focus on combating the tanks, they have to worry about other things, too, whereas a tank only has to focus on one thing: being a tank. It's not balanced.

My build doesn't just focus on doing damage...in fact, quite the opposite. My wizard has tons of terrain cards, but she doesn't always get them when she needs them. I just talked about this above. My priest is very supportive. And my warrior does focus on damage, sure.

Not fun, you say? I just had a battle not too long ago against three elf wizards. The guy put down terrain all over the victory squares the whole match and we spent the entire match running around the board using tactics to hide, avoid, out-smart one another, etc.. It was the funnest match I've had so far. It felt like a breath of fresh air. I was thinking "finally, a match where the whole objective isn't to tank the victory squares. This is fun".

All I'm saying is, we should have the option to disable the victory squares, not that they should be removed from the game. What would be wrong with that? What's wrong with giving players that option? What harm does it do?

 

They are in no way guaranteed to get armor. Not sure where you are getting that.

If you think tanks are so powerful and not balanced, why would you focus on damage and not being a tank, shoot take 3 tanks right?

( Which might have been me actually! ) But then okay, you're saying that the exact tactic I'm suggesting you to use, which you say doesn't work, works?

Sure that game may have been fun, but what happens when you have one dwarf or human warrior left, and they have one elf warrior left, and you have more health. All their warrior can do is run from you. So you chase him around the board for an hour. Do you quit? It becomes a who can play their cards faster so time runs out on the opponent. Not the tactics game I signed up for, that's for sure.

Theoretically? Not a lot. It does take the devs away from other work though. If you are a club member you can already make and play plenty of boards that don't have victory squares.

 

I was talking about move cards. Maybe I worded it wrong, but I was referring to them always guaranteed to get move cards.

I don't understand what you're saying here. Can you rephrase it, please?

I doubt running around the board for an hour would ever happen. There's enough variety in cards to combat such things. For example: humans have cards which allow you to draw more cards. This could give you more move cards than the elf warrior and allow you to successfully chase him down. Dwarves have those 8 distance move cards and things. I can't think of more ATM, sorry, bad memory, but I'm sure you can see my point. And I'm sure there are more cards that you or I haven't even seen yet that would combat such a situation. Not to mention that the boards are pretty small. That elf would have movement but he wouldn't be able to get too far.

I don't mean to sound rude, but wouldn't adding new options to the game be considered part of their "work"? Sure, there are more important things to focus on right now, but that doesn't mean this couldn't be added later.

Really? I didn't know that. That's awesome, but for club members only? I don't think that's right.

 

The only move cards that I'm aware of that are only available to one race is the elves through their racial skills. Any other move cards any race can get. If a human warrior is focus on card draw for some reason, he could potentially draw an additional move card from boots or step cards. The elf would have similar step cards and could just hold onto additional move cards. Unless the non-elf warrior draws a bunch of Nimble Strike cards it's highly unlikely that they would catch the elf.

As for the maps being small, you often don't have to get far away, just far enough. Happens all the time in adventures and pvp.

 

Just had a battle against three dwarves. Guess what happened? They ran to the middle and won the match by tanking. No strategy what-so-ever, just sat there and tanked. Super fun stuff... Seriously, devs, allow the option the turn victory squares off. I don't wanna have to go make a party of dwarves or warriors just to compete.

 

If you don't want to arrange a strategy around maps with Victory Squares, I can understand that. Honest! I prefer variety.

But I don't understand a lot of things you say about strategy: you don't need to make a party of Dwarves or Warriors to compete. I'm not sure how to equate "sitting on the Victory Squares" with "no strategy," especially since we're talking slow Dwarves: that must be impressive for them to get there before you. And if for some reason you didn't have a counter (e.g., moving a target, or literally any technique for killing a sitting duck), then I must commend the opponent for finding the weakness in your strategy.

Blindsight, of course, has said all this before me, but you keep repeating yourself about Dwarves and Warriors and "sitting there."

 

I've already stated that I use lots of terrain cards. I also use the whirlwind card. You don't always get them. What am I to do with my elves versing 2 or 3 dwarves camped on the victory squares and I'm not getting my terrain cards, hmm? Oh, step back cards you say? I don't use them on my warrior and I don't feel as I should have to. I should be allowed to use whatever I want, not what works against specific situations.

Dude, dwarves move. Just because their basic move card is slow doesn't mean they don't have ways to move. They get to the middle plenty fast. Not to mention boards are small. You must be facing noobs or something.

I'm sorry, but I think victory squares are kind of stupid. There is absolutely no strategy in rushing to the middle of the board and camping and whoever thinks there is, you don't know strategy. "They're there to speed up games!". Really? You think that's the best solution to making sure games don't take forever, forcing us to camp in the middle of the boards? Also, the devs want games to go fast, eh? Then why put 20 minutes on the clock?? With victory squares in place, no match will take that long. My longest match so far was about 12 minutes long. So, let's make sure games don't last too long, but let's put 20 minutes on the clock, though...oh, and add these squares which will make it so no match will ever take 20 minutes... Doesn't make sense.

I, as a player, like options. I'd like the option to be able to disable these squares and play against others on boards without them. This is a game-breaking thing for me. I don't think I'll continue playing Card Hunter for much longer if the whole match is gonna revolve around rushing to the middle and camping. That's not strategy. That's not fun.

Could any dev member at least post here and let me know if this sort of thing will never happen, or it's a possibility, or...anything? I'd really appreciate it.

 

And again, we get to the important part. The question: whether there will be non-Victory Square maps. That's the only reason for this thread.

Seriously, dude, I don't like getting in arguments. I'd rather help people, and I hope that most of my posts on this forum are helpful. I've seen a lot of . . . oh, I don't know what word to use: "loud" maybe. I've seen a lot of "loud" posts on the forum over the months, and I tend to start skimming when they get predictable. So I noticed that a lot of your posts were repeating yourself and getting away from the important part (the question for the devs), so I thought I'd test: do you want answers to your questions, or do you want to be angry and "loud"?

I don't normally poke people like this, because, again, I don't like getting in arguments, and I'd rather everyone were happy. If you just want to be angry, then I'll stop trying to help you. I'll be back if your actual questions get answered.

 

Yes. Exactly. I'd love for a dev to post in here and say whether or not this will happen...or, at least say if it's definitely not going to happen. Whether they are new maps specifically designed for not having victory squares, or they add an option to simply disable the squares on all maps and only play against others who have disabled them as well. I don't care which, I just wanna be able to play without them.

Also, my last post was a little rude to you because I felt you were rude first. This comment:

...seems sarcastic and rude to me. Maybe I'm just taking it wrong. It's not always easy to read through text. If you didn't mean it that way, then just let me know and I'll apologize.

 

Just had another match where this was a problem. It was against 2 dwarves and 1 wizard. My wizard got killed early on, as did his, and his dwarves camped the victory squares for 3 victory points. My wizard had the terrain cards, obviously. There was nothing I could do about it with my elves. I wasn't pulling the cards I needed. I only won by pure luck. I got the exact cards I needed on the last round before he was about to win just by tanking victory points alone while passing. Also, this was on a custom map where the victory squares were separated. Had this been on one of the standard maps, where his 2 dwarves would've been together, I would've lost regardless because I had to isolate one of them to do damage. This is a serious problem, guys.

The guy I faced agrees with me that this is a problem. I'm sure others will agree as well. I asked him to come and post here about it, but I don't know if he will.

 

Are you choosing elves because you like them aesthetically or for strategic reasons? If strategic, care to explain the reasoning?

 

Both.

They're great for movement, and movement comes in handy all the time.

 

Huh, didn't expect that.

When I said "honest," I totally meant "honest." I wrote it that way because I hoped being silly would make it more clear that it wasn't criticism, especially when set as counterpoint to the rest of the post. I read the rest as "more rude" than the opening line. Which probably says something about communication.

 

Then I apologize if I came off as rude towards you.

Care to comment on my post regarding the last match I had?

 

OK...I had to Google "turtling". Lol. It means defensive strategy, basically? Because that's the problem with having the victory squares. They promote tanking/camping/being defense.

Why casual matches only? Why not just create maps that are specifically designed for not having victory squares and allow them to be played whether casual or not? Also, why are the victory squares always bunched up together? If they were separated across the board it wouldn't be so bad. The fact that they're bunched only further promotes dwarves/warriors to rush the middle and camp.