[Feedback] Whirlwind ruins most games

Hrm, how about a change to something like this:

Tornado:
Rare, Magic, Arcane
Range 6, Burst 2

All characters within the area of effect are placed in a random square within the area of effect.

This keeps some of the lack of need for LOS that WWE currently has, keeps the random positioning but limits it to a set, generally recoverable, distance. It creates interesting targeting situations for both opponents and allies (including the caster). Similar to WWE may also help the enemy in some situations. While it is no longer an ultimate panic button, it can serve that purpose to some degree. This would also remove the opportunity for abuse that planning for WWEs allows.

Making WW more rare and available on less items along with changing WWE to Tornado, I believe, would resolve most of my issues them due to the reduction in the detrimental effects the cards currently have on tactical play.

 

Ok, with the new maps? WWE is definitely overpowered in the new 3 capture point map. The map is large and it takes a lot of effort to get onto the capture points, meaning that a wizard camping on one of the points can just cast WWE to move your character on the opposite side of the board for one or more almost guaranteed victory points.

 

Yeah these new maps are very weighted toward control wizards. It does tend to exacerbate the issue of WWE a bit.

 

Whirlwind Enemies should be gold, it´s too powerful. In addition it´s very unfun. If it was gold, at least we´d see less of it.

 

I just lost a fun, nailbiter of a game against Heretiick, in which his early Whirlwind Enemies put him in a good position. I think WW/WWE can set up interesting situations you wouldn't see otherwise, and I'd hate to see them removed entirely. But I agree that it shouldn't be possible to get more than a few in your deck, because repeated whirlwinds are just un-fun. (I believe Heretiick has 2 WWE's and a WW on a wizard, which seems eminently reasonable.)

My suggestions:
1) WW and WWE should only be on arcane items (not on robes).
2) Only one WW or WWE card per item
3) Items with WW or WWE should all have tokens, and -token items with WWE should have weak other cards.
4) Items that currently have WW/WWE on them should have WW and WWE downgraded to new cards that do mass maze effects.

 

Game gets released with WWE unchanged? Big mistake.

 

While I'll say I'm one of the biggest proponents of getting it changed (or removed really), there's no reason it can't/wont be changed later. Things will still be tweaked and balanced as the game goes on. Expect more content which will set things all in flux as well. Not so "big mistake" considering the format the game is in. Easy to change anything they want to, whenever they want to, if they want to.

 

I realize this is an unpopular opinion, but I've got to weigh in with it - both WW and WWE are gambles. WW seems somewhat less controversial, so I'll focus on why I don't have a problem with WWE.

When I hit you with a WWE, I am gambling on three things: one, that you're in a good enough tactical position that I'm only going to make things worse for you. Two, that I'm going to be better at playing the new game positions to my advantage than you are. And three, that this slop-shot approach is a better payoff than a straight-up attack.

In other words, if you've spent so many of your resources getting into a tactical position that my randomizing it is worse than getting hit with a freeze, a fire bolt, or a short perplexing ray, then I've employed the correct counterstrategy to yours. On the other hand, if I WWE you, and you respond by surrounding my wizard (who, again, is short an attack card now) via a Team Run, or even re-closing with a warrior who had a sprint in his pocket, then I have essentially lost my wizard to a failed gambit.

It doesn't seem to me that the card is overpowered at all - it's a strategic decision that is effective in some cases and not in others. It's not an obvious choice, either in deck-building or in play selection. I don't think I'd call it a mistake to run with the card as it is.

 

All of which are easy to control.

The issue is not that the card is Overpowered. It's not. The random nature of the card almost inherently makes it not OP. The issue I see with it is two fold: It can be planned for and thus mitigating or removing the negative effects of the randomness. It undermines the tactical nature of a great tactical game. When random game elements are the deciding factor in games it stops being a skill based, tactical, puzzle like game and becomes little more than die rolls. Some randomness (card draw etc.) helps it be a little more than just a math problem, but too much removes skill (and thus competition) from the game.

 

I'm not sure how you can simultaneously make the points that the card can be "planned for, mitigating and removing the effects of the randomness", and also that it's so random that it undermine's the game's tactical nature. Unless you're suggesting that only the person playing the card could possibly be prepared for it?

I think that in order to play a tactical game, you have to be prepared for reasonably foreseeable outcomes of your opponents' moves. It's more straightforward to calculate the risk of a parry or an armor die roll, but I think the philosophy is the same. Consider this:

I wouldn't use my Obliterating Hack on you (from the front) if I thought you might have a parry.
I would use my Obliterating Hack if I thought you only had an Unreliable Block
I would not position my wizard to take Spark potshots if I think you have armor that procs on 3+
I would position my wizard to take Spark potshots if I think you have armor that procs on 5+
I wouldn't use my Team Run early in the round if I thought you might have a Whirlwind in hand.

It's all still just layers of risk and risk mitigation. The biggest difference is that there's no longer a single die roll and a clear-cut "good / bad" outcome; everything is on a sliding scale. But I don't think that a bad Whirlwind is any worse than having your enemy's damage-four armor proc three times in a row. In fact, I'd argue that handling a bad Whirlwind result is *easier* to do without planning; the Whirlwind I can handle by making decisions with the move cards I will always have, but once your armor is in play there's not much I can do except "already have armor-mitigating cards in my deck."

 

Exactly, the team playing WWE can plan for it. Bunch up your characters, withhold moves/attacks before playing WWE in hope of getting your opponent out of position and possibility out of options. The opposing team, one they are aware of WWE can hold moves but they can not tactically plan for WWE being cast and having one of their team dropped within all three enemy characters range.

I think you've made my point when it comes to WWE. You, as my opponent, have a very limited ability to reasonably plan foreseeable outcomes if I'm running heavy WWE. Randomness takes over the game from your point of view.

Whirlwind is a slightly different beast because both team can prepare only by withholding their actions -- thus causing a slowdown in play -- where once it's played, the outcome (perhaps of the entire game) is determined purely by the die rolls. This removes a lot of tactics from the game, and often even ends the game one way or another, sometimes due to one of the players simply conceding after seeing the results.

I feel like I'm now just saying the same things over and over (and I think I am) so I'll stop harping on it. They aren't tier 1 cards, they aren't OP, but I feel they take away from the game by removing skillful play and tactics in favor of randomness.

 

I think we're having a fundamental difference of philosophy - I really don't feel like randomness takes over the game, and I think that "not staying where I landed" is a reasonably foreseeable outcome even when I don't know the degree to which I'd be moved. I feel like my ability to respond to a WWE is, fundamentally, under my control, and that a WWE is closer to changing the tactical scenario than it is to surrendering the outcome of the game to a die roll.

But, I think you're also right in that we've probably covered the ground we need to cover; our cases having been made, it ultimately boils down to preference & opinion. I really appreciate the discussion - while I don't look at the issue in the same way as you, I definitely have a better understanding of which aspects of the problem are frustrating and why. Thanks for hashing this out with me.

 

Well certainly you can rationalize an expected outcome of "my characters will land somewhere on the board," but I just don't consider that "reasonable" as far as tactical planning. More so if WWE is cast more than once. I can reasonably plan that "one of my characters will die if I land next to their warriors" but that doesn't allow you to plan around that outcome.

I'm curious as to how you feel your reaction to WWE is under your control if you are not the caster? Certainly what you do after the fact, adjusting to tactics based on new positioning is. The options you have based on the positions you have been put int, however, aren't something you are in control of and can very much limit your play.

 

TL;DR: If my build is sensitive to board location, and I'm not ready to handle WWE, then I have a poor build.


That's a super interesting question! It's very situational, but for the sake of conversation, let's consider one of my recent MP teams and how Whirlwind affected my decisions both during build and in play.

I wanted to focus on the victory square aspect of multiplayer, with the thinking that many opponents have one "tank" character and two that are easier to pick off. If I can hold the victory square(s) for two rounds, then I can win without killing the tank. But I still need to make sure I can hit the other two characters hard enough to leverage the kill.

Right away, I see that controlling the battlefield location is important. That rules out dwarves for this build; they are too slow. I'd like an elf to make a rush for the victory square, but that elf needs to be strong enough to shrug off some hits that will certainly come into play. Ergo, first character of the build is an elf warrior. I make sure they have good boots and armor.

Next up, I need to do some scrapping - the greater half of this strategy hinges on assassinating two characters, perhaps while they're being protected by the tank. Dwarves are out but elves are fragile; it is in humans we must place our hope. I give him a step-based build; he needs to be able to close with wizards very quickly and hit hard when he does. His human skill gets slotted with team-moving effects, his helmet gets a Shuffle Team, and he is otherwise meant to swing hard and connect.

Finally, I've got one character left. Traditional wisdom says cleric, but the strategy moves too fast for clerics to properly buff, and if my strikers are way in the front of the battlefield they might not even be in line for healing. I could better use a wizard. I'm also liking the human "command" type skills, so I settle on a human wizard. He gets an encumber / terrain modifier strategy. (Full disclosure: I later added whirlwinds to the wizard's build, but I feel like that decision muddies this discussion, so I'll talk about the earlier build.)

So, the strategy is a fast warrior to claim the territory, a strong warrior to defend it and kill off the interlopers, and a wizard to help manage the battlefield. So far, so good. Like many builds, I have to pay careful attention to mobility and territory: if I can't get my warriors close, then both cornerstones of my strategy fail badly.

During game play, then, the specific weaknesses I'm susceptible to are Whirlwind Enemies, Whirlwind, Freeze, Winds of War, and difficult terrain modifiers (mud, stone spikes, etc). I need to decide how I will address these. Terrain modifiers I can handle with multiple move cards of any quality (even Shuffle will get me through a mud pit). Winds of War can largely be mitigated by the step strategy; if someone moves me away from their wizard they're probably hoping I can't counter with a Nimble Strike. Freeze gets taken care of, as much as is possible, by high-value moves and push effects. I'm still vulnerable to Freeze, but it's a hard card to come by. If I get hit with two of those in a match, I can probably recover; three and I'm going to be having problems. So, as much as is possible, fighters should remain behind cover while closing to strike.

Now, there's WW and WWE. My worst case is this: my opponent is running a team designed to hold ground and make it difficult for me to approach (e.g., two dwarf warriors and a wizard). In this case, I would need to expend a lot of resources trying to close in enough to hold the victory squares and try to stop their warriors from establishing a defensive hold. If I burn through all my move cards early on, then a WWE can seriously stymie my strategy. My strategy to counter, then, is to not burn my move cards early when there's an opposing wizard I suspect has a WWE. It's very situational - if your wizard comes at me, Sparks blazing, I'm going to assume that you don't have a control build. I need to close quickly, burn my moves, and kill the wizard. If your wizard is hiding behind cover, I can safely bet you're rolling control. I need to make you *think* I'm out of moves when I'm not. I use all my visible move cards, and then - even if I have stuff in reserve - I pass.

If I had no moves up my sleeve, and you WWE me into a bad position... well, it's probably not much worse than where I started. MP maps put me as far away from the victory squares as possible. If every variable comes up against me in the opening round, then the net result is that you had a turn to move into position and the work that I put in was undone. But, the strategy of my build is still solid - I continue to advance, with speed, in the next round.

I found it a viable strategy, though I did tweak it a bit here and there as maps changed and as my equipment gave me more options. The essential formula is the same as any other: this build has strengths, and it has weaknesses, so I mitigate the weaknesses. In my experience, this build has a tougher problem with armor than it does with WWE. It *definitely* has more trouble with Freeze, particularly.

Long story short (ha! too late), I am in control of my response to WWE in exactly the same way I'm in control of my response to anything else: if I don't have an answer to a problem I can anticipate, then my build is wrong and I need to make corrections. If my build is right, and I'm faced with the problem I anticipated, then I counter situationally according to the strategy of the build. If the counter is ineffective, then either I need to revisit the counter, revisit the build, or investigate whether the problem is presented by a game mechanic that can't be solved with what I have. WWE has numerous effective counters, and I was satisfied with this one. I therefore do not feel that WWE deprives me of control.

 

Aren't you contradicting yourself aright at the start here? If you need an elf to rush to the victory square I'd say that's pretty board location sensitive and thus, by your definition, a poor build. If your wizard is hiding behind cover, I can safely bet you're rolling control. I need to make you *think* I'm out of moves when I'm not. I use all my visible move cards, and then - even if I have stuff in reserve - I pass....
I found it a viable strategy, though I did tweak it a bit here and there as maps changed and as my equipment gave me more options. The essential formula is the same as any other: this build has strengths, and it has weaknesses, so I mitigate the weaknesses. In my experience, this build has a tougher problem with armor than it does with WWE. It *definitely* has more trouble with Freeze, particularly.

Long story short (ha! too late), I am in control of my response to WWE in exactly the same way I'm in control of my response to anything else: if I don't have an answer to a problem I can anticipate, then my build is wrong and I need to make corrections.... WWE has numerous effective counters, and I was satisfied with this one. I therefore do not feel that WWE deprives me of control.[/quote]

That is pretty much taking the tactical side out of the game and only looking at high level strategies IMO. For example, getting into range for step attacks, holding points, flanking with high mobility, calculating the chances of your damage vs their chance of having protection/avoidance for it are all out the window. Sure you can DO all of that still, but then I just WWE and you have to do it again... then as soon as you start to put your plan into action, I WWE again...

Holding your cards and high mobility warriors can work well against WWE decks... the more high mobility warriors the better. Then again there isn't anything that doesn't work just as well against. I don't see how this gives you control though. If I WWE and you are dropped by my 3 characters (who will always be together) chances are you lose that character -- and generally quit as soon as you do (in my experience).

You can plan against control in general, but not WWE IMO. No mater your gameplan or build, no matter your tactics, there are no plays, no decisions that you can make to ensure that you won't be dropped into bad situations that cost you the game.

(P.s. I love this, my 5 line post was TL so you write a 44 line post. )

 

Every build is sensitive to position to some degree, and any build with one or more warrior who doesn't happen to draw sprint is very much so.

You seem to be saying that the counter to WWE is to just save up moves, but I do not find this to be a very effective counter. Once combat has started, the large majority of the board is a 'bad position' for your characters to be placed in, and it usually takes multiple moves to get any non-wizard back to somewhere useful after they have been WWEd. Team moves or Sprint can help but you can't have very many of them in your deck (especially compared to the potential WWEs). Having all humans, that still leaves you with only one to three Move Team cards per character's deck, and from experience you cannot rely at all on drawing those against a wizard team. Sitting still for a turn to save up a move card puts your team at a significant disadvantage against any non-WWE strategy, as the opponent gets a chance to save up combat cards while you will enter combat with one less non-move on all characters.

And all that is before factoring in the effects of frost spells. If a character gets hit with a frost spell before or while returning from a WWE, they will need a large amount of team movement to avoid being forced to idle for two or so rounds.

 

There's an important "and" there. If I'm ready to handle WWE, it's not a poor build.

I'm not sure what distinction you're drawing that de-couples "high level strategies" from "the tactical side" of the game. It seems to me that the tactics of the game are largely the implementation of strategy defined by the deck build.

So, you're saying that the more your deck relies on the strategy, the harder I have to work to counter it. That seems like a given for any situation.

Sure there is. Terrain modifiers, long-range wizards, and a priest-as-healing-factory come immediately to mind. But even if there weren't, are you saying that because a strategy is good in many cases, that somehow it's less valid in this particular case?

This might be the pivot point we're not connecting on. This is, in fact, a card game; it is inherently built as strategy-upon-chance. The control you have is the control you exert over your situation as it is dealt. To be clear, this is not to say that "randomness is all" - on the scale from Snakes & Ladders to Chess, I think this is far less random than many strategy games. The "randomness" of the Whirlwind isn't merely the result of some arbitrary event - it is a calculated, hopefully strategic attack brought upon you by your opponent, and against which there are many reasonable and common defenses. In short, it is no different from any other attack in the game.

 

That's exactly how I'm approaching it. You can plan your strategy for it, but your tactics (combinations of minor moves each building upon the next for a strategic goal that has been set) are pretty much moot once WWE comes into play. Distance, positioning, facing, even the cards you are holding at times all no longer matter no matter how many resources you've put into using them to get an advantage or set up an attack.

True. But I think there's a key issue that you point out here. YOU have to counter ME. I don't have minor choices to make should I feel someone is too close or if one of my characters might die. Generally though, I don't care what approach you take to the game. It doesn't affect my gameplan much at all.

I disagree. Terrain mods aren't generally going to stop Sprint, Team! for instance. Or any of the other high value movement tactics. Long range wizards aren't long range against highly mobile warriors, healing factory priests are all but dead (I believe) with the changes to the two cards that made that work.

I'm not saying the strategy of high mobility warriors is less valid in this case, just as I wouldn't say that smart and careful play is good in this case either. It's just a given, not something particularly important in this case. I think this goes back to "I don't care what you are playing, I'm playing WWE so if I get the right randomness, I win." Sure some builds fare better against WWEs, what I consider the top deck being one of them.

Right, but if I get to decide when you are dealt more randomness... it takes a lot of control out of your hands.

I agree with you on that somewhat. Again, I don't think the card themselves are OP within the game. I feel it breaks the essence of the game (tactics) in favor of randomness. I also think WWE can be used (I prefer to say abused) in such a way that the caster can only get neutral or beneficial results while removing all semblance of tactics from the opponent. "Oh look at all those step attacks, have fun using them to get back into the game."

 

Oh, man, I feel like a tool - the TL;DR I led with a couple posts up wasn't me saying *your* post was too long. I was trying to sum up my 44-line post with a one-line summary... the "TL;DR" version. Sorry for the misunderstanding!

I think we're getting close to the crux of the issue, though. Let's take an unusually unlucky loss - say, drawing no attack cards two rounds in a row - and call it a "bad beat". I see a few ways to wind up with a bad beat outside of whirlwinds, and sometimes, there really is nothing you can do about it. Let's think of this as the base state of the game, a direct result of it being deck-and-card based.

Now, we introduce the concept of Whirlwind. I look at it and think "man, this could wind up making a bad beat for either party, but it's got some interesting tactical uses." It seems like you're looking at it and going "aw, crap, this might have some strategic value, but it's gonna wind up making bad beats on both sides of the table." I might just have fewer objections to chaos impacting the efficacy of my tactics.

Man... I really wish we had access to our Beta equipment. I'd love to sit down for a few whirlwind-inspired practice sessions with you, and compare our takes on what the effective outcomes of the cards are. I'll bet we'd see a glass-half-empty / glass-half-full kind of pattern emerge, but that's just a guess.

 

In this situation you can not engage or disengage and wait out the 'bad beat' you got due to your draws. This, of course, isn't always an option, especially late in the game where the next turn is going to decide the game. I'd still argue that you can do something to combat this. You can create your build with consistency in mind. Deck thinning, cycling even pathfinding to help you get to your attacks.

Speaking specifically about Whirlwind, yes, it's a panic button to help you get out of a bad situation and has it up and down sides. While this still removes the detailed tactics from the game, it does so for both sides equally. I only really have a problem with the number of times this can be cast per game.

When you consider WWE however, the 'bad beat' chance you are offering, you are using a single card in an attempt to give the other team a 'bad beat' with little to no downside to you. Additionally, there is NOTHING the opponent can do to avoid it short of trying to stack their build with as many blocks as possible in hopes that all three characters block each of my 11 Whirlwinds. In doing so, they dreadfully reduce their offensive capability and still don't guarantee that they won't get a 'bad beat' off of just one of my WWEs which can cost them a character fairly easily.

Yup, you posted too late! But then, I'll be able to recreate my build faster than you can yours....another problem with WWE!