[Suggestion] Stopping Draw and Trait Chains

Far sweeping changes are necessary, control wizards and trait cycling are very deeply embedded in Cardhunter. It'll be hard to get them out, the nerf to inspiring presence speaks to that, they couldn't go after the current ogre, they went after the old one. And frankly the nerf they they gave to that card WAS convoluted and weird. It only draws attack cards?

Give it a 4+ die roll, very precedented. And no this wouldn't solve control wizards in it's entirety. But it would solve the problem of a much smaller deck than everyone else. It would also strike at the heart of their build, which is consistency. Without that, they won't be be nearly as viable, and we can all move onto the next head of the hydra, WWE. Which despite it's drawbacks, is a random button that benefits the user more often than not. But I digress.

We all agree this is a problem, and my solution has the upside of the least amount of moving parts and it effects the abusers of the current system.

 

Edited out.

Main "ogre" right now is not control wizards, it's the same thing that has been a problem ever since the game came out: Nimble Strike and Vibrant Pain. Everyone knows they are OP, and almost everyone is asking for a nerf. It is probably never going to happen though because apparently it is forbidden candy. The current trend seems to be 1 WW/WWE wizard backed up by two warriors with step attacks. I would estimate that about 75% of my opponents use some kind of variation of this build (with Nimble Strikes), which is making the meta really boring atm. Other popular choice looks to be Firestorm spam, which I think is the worst build known to man because it pretty much removes the positional aspect of the game. Today for example the only truly unique and different build I've fought was turinturamba's, so kudos for him for that.

While I do think that trait cycling should be slightly nerfed (by nerfing cards and/or a couple of items), I think that most suggestions on this topic go from overly complicated to plain old crazy. Like this one:

Do you realize how big of a change that would be? Currently the only good thing about negative traits is the fact that you can draw a replacement card. Without that replacement card, many items would instantly become unusable, as would many builds that heavily rely on negative traits. This would also hurt the pace of the game because you would have to pass more because you less cards. This kind of solution is a textbook example of how not to balance a game, because we are not looking to destroy builds, only balance them.

 

Card draw will always be a problem.
One possible solution is to apply the same method used to balance Talented Healer.
IE: remove the card draw ability and replace it with a different effect.

 

Card drawing is needed in a card game.. that's one of the biggest incentives to play a priest in my opinion - creating a card advantage coupled with dmg resistance either through nimbus or healing. Abusing it however should not be possible and it is good that action is taken to stop it. But it isn't the only problem! Wizads alone shouldn't be able to reduce their decks by 1/3rd with traits that are unharmfull towards their abilities (lava + manipulation) and furthermore coupled with some of the best spells available (wow + wall of fire). Squemish should be on staves which do dmg, and arcane items like Runestone should have a weak spell instead of a trait, like some spray or zap - it's a common item after all and is better then many epic items of similar lvl due to the nature of the trait and the spells it comes with.

Frankly, I am frustrated by so much discussion going on regarding this and othr balance issues and so few replies and little input from Blue Manchu. It's like the team is set dead against changs to item card composition "because we don't want to". The current inequality where wizzards have good items which also reduce their deck size while warrior's items come mostly with some worthless card like rusty armour or stuck arrow or moderately bad to really bad traits (trip, cowardly, superstitious, fumble, traveling curse etc.) is biased towards wizards plain and simple. And a biased game will alwas be irritating to some extent, despite it's greatness in general design terms.

I hope for a more energetic approach towards balance on exisiting items and classes in terms of deck size control and item selection. A competitive warrior needs (at higher lvls for sure) at least a few high-end items (epic/legendary) while a control wizard will do just fine with a nearly "peasant" deck. Truth is, we can disscuss this back and forth and spew out tons of ideas and propositions while nothing ever happens, so why bother?

 

A) It keeps us off the streets.
B) It lets us vent.
C) Someone might actually come up with a brilliant idea.

 

One suggestion for the Trembling Staff: replace one Vulnerable with Dropped Guard.

 

That is an excellent point. I haven't really thought about it before but that is exactly where Squeamish should be. Funny thing is that currently it's the other way around. Best items that have Squeamish are probably Runestone and Blood Locket. And the cards they have (Winds of War, Wall of Fire, Path of Knives) are deal a lot of damage but suffer very little from Squeamish because the damage is indirect. Well, "very little" is actually exaggerating it because only one of them that suffers (WoW), and even that requires that your target has 1 HP, so in reality the effect of Squeamish is almost zero.

Reasoning why obvious changes for the better are not made, can be read here. Apparently BM wants to avoid balancing at all cost if it would mean some popular items lose their power, for example Vibrant Pain. This is something that many of us have suspected, and now we had an official confirmation from Jon. I personally think this is sad because it basically means that card collecting take priority over game balance.

I agree. Wizard is definitely the most powerful class for new players because you don't need a single rare card to be very effective. But once you have those legendary items like Vibrant Pain, warriors gain a huge advantage. BM should nerf common/uncommon items like Runestone, but also nerf legendary warrior items like Vibrant Pain.

I've seen a million brilliant ideas posted on these forums, but not a single one has ever been implemented, nor have I seen a dev say that they will implement that idea in the future. I'm not saying that BM owes us and should implement all brilliant ideas, I'm just saying that having a brilliant idea will probably mean nothing.

 

So I suppose the idea of this thread was to try and come up with a way to slow down traits and drawing mechanics in general. But is anything simple to fix in Card Hunter? Apparently not.

I think that you make a good point Flax. The fact is that certain items with certain cards are causing trait abuse. Has anything been done about those items yet? No.
Wouldn't it be nice if all of the cards (or at least some of the items!) were re-valued so that you don't end up with things like Trembling Staff and Vibrant Pain? Yeah, but I can sense resistance to reworking the entire game even if things are currently pretty imbalanced competitively. I would like to see some serious changes to this game, because playing a game with the same cards and the same problems gets pretty boring after... a month. Now when I talk to people about Card Hunter it always ends with "you should try it, but it will get better in a few weeks..." and I have been saying that for a while now.

 

Setting proper values for positive traits seems pretty easy. Setting proper values for (or better assignment of) negative traits seems a bit harder due to their nature, but I think it can be done.

After playing around with it a bit, I think the OP's idea of defining draw cards for Inspiring Presence has a lot of merit. Only allowing attack cards really doesn't make much sense.

 

An easy solution to trait cycling is to reduce the number of traits on items, take the trait off of runestone and 1 trait off trembling staff, put on zaps or fire sprays and hey, the traits in a deck are down from 12 to 8.

Alternatively, more items wth light traits for warriors and priests so they can cycle on par with wizards.

But of course changes to item composition will not come through...

 

This part edited out - so we should learn to recognize and stop it, like chain-drawing and trait-cycling... 8^S

But seriously, why are EX-beta testers still talking about this game as if it is in alpha/beta? Card Hunter is a RELEASED game-- meaning the pool of players is much bigger than it ever was in closed beta, i.e. the active forum-mers or top-ranking players form an even SMALLER part of the players of all ilk who are equally entitled to have a "sense of entitlement" about the game.

I mean, anyone who has been in more than a few betas should know that Blue Manch is not going to balance Card Hunter according to how loud or logical the forum posts are-- they are going collect/collate the game data seasonally and THEN check the forums for suggestions (vs BUGS, which they will of course fix ASAP) if/when they notice something "off", based on the direction/vision THEY have for the game... THAT is how devs of online games work.


TL;DR:

1. "Shifts/developments" in the meta-game are NOT bugs-- i.e. the game is working as intended, though it can always improved... so don't sulk if nobody seems to be listening to you.

2. "Balancing" the game means changing it FOR something and AGAINST something else-- i.e. stop chain-drawing/trait-cycling (without say, increasing card-in-hand) and you will reduce possible plays each turn (thereby slowing the game down), etc.... so don't pout if it is not exactly YOUR game.

3. Card Hunter is NOT in beta (and Blue Manchu is not Blizzard)-- i.e. they are not going to nerf/buff something just to see if they are going have to UN-nerf/buff it later... I mean, at least Blue Manchu/Card Hunter has very clear ideas about what they want each class/race to be (vs Blizzards/Hearthstone nerfing, then un-nerfing, buffing, then un-buffing their cards/classes).

 

After my 7 months of playing the game, I've come to understand that the design philosophy is the problem, not any of the mechanics in and of themselves. Namely the fact that the devs are too short-handed, unwilling, or incapable of fixing problems as they arise, OR they simply believe the meta is fine or not worth fixing.

The devs appear, based solely on my observations, to be focusing their time nearly exclusively on other platforms and or upcoming new 'content', rather than any focus on balancing the current multiplayer. If this is in fact the philosophy, then no suggestion or feedback really matters at this point.

I've made thread after thread after thread after thread, with numerous posts, offering my own opinion as to why certain things are imbalanced, broken, or asking for answers, OR pointing out things that are either bugs or working as intended, but in need of clarification, to dev silence. They've decided to ignore the issue of NS/VP (the most broken thing in the game the entire time I've played). The only response I've noticed, is an implicit admission that it is broken, through the future planned introduction of 'counter-cards' to step-attacks.

Card-draw / trait-cycling are problems that the devs appear incapable or unwilling to fix as well. The only time the devs have done a meaningful balance since release has been to nerf priest-card drawing. Since then, the kind of hands off, laissez-faire approach to balance has been troubling at best.

So, respectfully, I disagree with the majority of the people posting here, but not for the reasons that your suggestions in fixing draws/traits is wrong, its simply that the problem right now is that the devs do not have the time or desire to fix the problems, or they do not acknowledge that said problems exist. The posts about things that aren't fun/balanced are multitudinous. The silence from the devs is as vast as the posts.

*And as SLG alluded to; this is more of a focus on collecting powerful broken cards or cool ones, rather than on actual balance. Once I had that as my understanding, I decided it would be best to simply stop focusing on rating, and to spend 100% of my time on trying new comps/new items etc until or if the devs balance MP. It's not as fun as if the MP was actually balanced, but, its really improved my overall understanding of the game, specific items in general, and I do so enjoy playing a person several hundred points higher than me who really has been carried by their items, and making them lose tons of rating.

 

Card Hunter right now is just like a fledgling TCG without a banlist or limited list. The creators don't want to undo the cards that they have made and just want to push forwards with the game and release new, more powerful cards (and items). People try and collect the best items so that they can make the best decks and win more often. The silly thing is that these items aren't like real cards; they can't be traded, bought or sold. They can't increase or decrease in value and frustrate players who have/want them. And most of the problem items were probably bought with small amounts of Gold (100 or less!), not even real money. I just find it stupid and predictable that 90% of wizards are using Robe of Lightness/Electroporter Novice/Trembling Staff because they are THE BEST tokenless items for those slots and you would be stupid not to use them, and then are also likely to use Runestone (along with any other tokened items they want). Just the simple trait draw power from those 3 items makes these items very useful. The problem is that this kills variety. Everyone wants to use these items. Why bother with anything else?

A banlist (or in this digital game, nerfs and buffs) is a healthy change to any game which runs into a problem with said overused, overpowered cards/items. Refusing to do anything about them because "you can't rely on a card or item remaining valuable after you've collected it." ? What is that supposed to mean? Like I said, these things aren't really valuable (yet). It's not like we are trying to remove said items from the game, that would be discouraging. Encouraging Variety in deckbuilding and gameplay is the goal here.

No, what works against the excitement of collecting is that once you get your Trembling Staff, Robe of Lightness, and Electroporter Novice, every other item with the same cost becomes irrelevant and useless to you. It just doesn't make sense 90% of the time to use anything else on a wizard.
It would be nice to fix these problem items with their problem Traits. We shall see.

I want to stop here and remind everyone to read this entire post.
Changes are coming, the game will either improve or die trying.

 

This is from the post Jade303 linked, and it answers all the problems of pilgrim bailey and scaredlittlegirl. The Devs DO listen they just don't comment cause when they put their hand on the scales it causes a big shift. And further, they fundamentally disagree with the idea that constant balance changes are either necessary or a good thing. I for one like this philosophy, the meta is delicate and they should think long and hard before they mess with it. Honestly the the unintended consequences of the draw nerf probably just reinforces this idea. Our role here in the feedback forums is to be a think-tank, not to enact or expect change. We post our problems and solutions and debate among ourselves. If the devs agree and change the game, all the better, if they do as they have said they are doing, well what did you expect?

 

"The meta is delicate"

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

the devs constantly try to shake up the ENVIRONMENT with new PvP maps. They don't want to preserve a given ecosystem, and they certainly are not micromanaging a "meta" (as very distinct from an environment).

 

Maybe I missed something because I didn't read all of the posts in this thread but what are these unintended consequences you speak of?

Also, as a side note, I hope Jon doesn't regret posting what he did.
The amount of quotes and replies he's getting since on many different threads is huge, I guess that was to be expected though, given the fact we got a bit of insight into the process.
I just hope the backlash won't discourage any of the devs to share more in the future...

 

What is this backlash you speak of? Of course revelations into the fundamental design philosophy of Card Hunter will be discussed here. I don't recall any particularly menacing pitchfork-waving, though. Quoting the post several times is necessary as a) it's almost the only official info we have on the issue b) using primary sources is a good practise anywhere.

If anything, the repeated quoting speaks of the scarcity of such information. Blue Manchu have chosen to talk very sparingly of such matters since the game was released. It's weird as during beta the communication was frequent and deep. Now it's scarce and very guarded. I don't understand why. Why did release suddenly set talking about the game in stone and behind thick bars? If anything, the communication should be more frequent and open now once the money and customer relationship floodgates have been thrown open.

Maybe it's just a matter of resources, there's no longer a crowd of devs on it. Jon and Ben (and Farbs? Who else am I missing?) can't write weekly essays on the forum on top of their other duties. I kinda still wish they could. I for one could wait for new content 10% longer if it would mean getting e.g. weekly views from the top, more forum/blog back and forth on the game issues du jour.

 

It's probably a combination of resources and the fact the game is no longer in beta so most of the long term decisions had been already made.
It is my opinion, and my opinion only, that some people have pulled out the virtual pitchforks if you will and are being relentless which may lead to decreased communication from the devs which would be a shame.
Can this hurt the game? maybe, but I'm not interested in "justice", rather in not having the devs feel like they have to weigh every word to the point of not sharing at all.
They have made their decisions, which may change in the future, and I feel we should respect those, even if we disagree.
Just so we're clear, I'm one of those as well who thinks nerfs and buffs shouldn't be put on a pedestal and should be done more frequently.

 

Just so we're clear, I spoke about communication, not game changes. More communication would be good no matter what the game design decisions are.

Why should the devs weigh every word? This is not a court of law. If we the players misunderstand something, they can always just post a clarification. Speak often and single words carry less weight. Speak at a frequency of stone tablets from a mountaintop and religions get built around your weighty missives before you get a chance to amend them.

I agree hounding the devs accomplishes nothing but makes the houndee look small and petulant. On the other hand, no response leads to frustration and raised voices. Frequent communication would defuse this.