[Feedback] Upcoming Balance Change MEGATHREAD

Holy crap. What the hell are you doing, BM? Do you think about the consequences of your changes at all?

Winds of War/Gust of War change: they are playable now only to push enemies on lava; that means almost unplayable. What sense is to push an enemy elf 2 squares back if his regular move is 4?
Encumber nerf: this virtually destroyed encumber cards and nullified the NS nerf that was the initial reason of all changes. Warriors with the step attacks will still dominate the game.
Cleansing cards upgrade: the only good change.
Flight Aura upgrade: this is insane. Now we will face the elven assassins flying to the enemy wizards and backstabbing them. The whole "zone of control" concept is destroyed. Great work for sure...
Nimble Strike upgrade: even more insane, as NS can be used in large quantities. The warriors should NOT fly without some arcane/divine help! Congratz BM, now VP is as valuable and essential as it was before.
Cause Fumble nerf: means almost nothing.
Draw Limit upgrade: please show me at least one deck where the new draw limit is going to be regularly exceeded. IMHO the whole "draw limit" isn't necessary at all.

Seriously, you seem to react to people's opinions, not to the real game state, and that's a critical fault for a CCG designer. People often express faulty opinions, based on their previous experience that isn't going to be valid with the new cards and rules. You also tend to destroy the whole strategies out of irrational fear of something bad (Firestorm, now wizards control, what next?) Firestorm wasn't going to become overpowered with the changes, and encumbrance wasn't OP as well. I somebody doesn't like these strategies that doesn't mean they should be destroyed.

What you did now is the return to the original game state. Everybody will play either two warriors + a priest (MF, healing and drawing) or two warriors + a wizard (dissolve armor, terrain effects and direct damage). Looks like you really need a good CCG designer I could serve, if you wish - and I promise you a healthy metagame with minimal changes.

Rare Item Shopping deserves a special note. 10 legendaries per week is better than we have now (I have no legendaries at all this week for instance), but, again, why do you listen to the alpha males who are speaking out of their past experience? They got everything they need and want to remain the kings of the hill, that's obvious. 10 per day was a great idea to attract the new players; I seriously doubt that they are going to wait several weeks until they get enough good items to compete. You should add a "restock" button at least, with the limited number of restocks per week and progressively increased price of each restock (i.e. 1000 gold for the first restock, 5.000 for the second and 10.000 for the third).
I've got a question based on the picture: will the legendaries cost 12.500 gold now??? Epics for 1000-5500 and rares for 200-1400?

 

Ector, you're welcome to prove your points on the test server. This is your chance to show Blue Manchu some of the "real game state" and prove that you're not just spouting some of the "people's opinions" you mention. By the way, the latest changes are largely based on gameplay statistics gathered on the test server from the many matches played there with the rebalanced build, not on anyone's opinions.

 

I think you're jumping to a lot of conclusions quickly without testing.

WoW/GoW change probably isn't bad enough for them to be unplayable. They are more about being used after someone moves to alter their position than before they've used a movement card.
Warriors with Step 1 won't really change the game much when casters can just walk away.
Yes, Cleansing Aura is a good change.
Flight Aura not being removable through damage does seem a bit of a weird change. Maybe removed on a roll of 6 would be best (like Altruism).
NS change seems fine, it will make it more interesting. With Encumber making it a Step 1 Flight means nothing since Flight only matters at 2+.
Yes, I do believe the Cause Fumble nerf was too low.
I think they don't want Draw Limits to be noticed outside of extreme circumstances from this change. The only decks it should affect now are ones that spam traits and draw cards or the "unlimited draw" decks. Not sure it is the best solution, but again I'd suggest testing it before removing it completely.

 

I think the account used for that screenshot just had low renown, so the shop prices are very high.

Everyone: thanks for the feedback. Please playtest.

 

I am a bad player, alas. I make a lot of mistakes and think too slowly. Also, one player is never going to show anything.

If this is true, I'd like to see the statistics and the way used to collect it. I have a degree in mathematics, and I know how the statistics should and shouldn't be collected. If somebody got screwed with the control wizards - that doesn't mean that the control wizards are OP.

 

Don't you think skill has a level of importance with balance design?

I do agree that statistics would be interesting to read. I wouldn't put complete faith in them though as a lot of balancing on high profile games (like League of Legends) is primarily done though testing and feel rather than pure numbers. For example, Wukong was considered insanely OP for the longest time but wasn't nerfed because the general perception was that he was weak and hitting him would have killed people actually exploring the character and his counters.

 

I just can think, as well as you and most the others I guess Let's think a bit together?

It wouldn't probably bad enough if it wouldn't be combined with the encumbrance nerf. Let's start thinking here. Why the encumbrance/pushing cards were played? Because the fragile wizards needed to prohibit the mighty warriors to approach them. If your wizard allowed the enemy warrior to get close, he's going to die very soon, as it should be. Warriors rule at short distance, wizards rule at the long one. How far your typical dwarven wizard can move per round? 2 squares; they rarely have a lot of movement cards. How far can a warrior move if he's fully packed with step attacks? Even an encumbered dwarven warrior will move 3-4 squares per turn. What does that mean? If you even encumber and push him, you will just keep the distance! That means the whole position control strategy fails versus the elven warriors, and thus becomes unplayable.

No, the casters aren't going to have that much step attacks. A warrior can have 15 step attacks of even more. AFAIK the primary reason for the change was to make the non-step attacks more playable; this new change returns the step attacks supremacy. Yes, encumber should completely shut down the step attacks! This is the only way to balance them.

If somebody would play encumber at all, which I doubt, as it doesn't ensure the reliable control anymore (see above). But anyway, you aren't going to say that everyone should play encumber to defend versus NS, are you? Move 2 Flight and attack = "I fly over your char and backstab him". This ignores zone of control and negates blocks. This allows to fly over acid or spikes, or to get into the 2*2 victory area even if the enemies are trying to prevent that. Even though the damage was decreased, NS clearly became more powerful.

If the trait spamming is a problem, then BM should limit the number of traits on various items (Electroporter Novice comes to mind). If there are combos allowing "unlimited draw", some cards should get "you can play this only once per turn". But inventing a special game limits just to prevent an extremely rare abuse isn't logical.

 

Thinking is a dime a dozen. Testing is what is important. You should go on the test server and test instead of just theorycrafting.

Warriors packed with step attacks can't move 3 or 4 squares per turn any more -- that's why control needed to be toned down. Encumber completely shutting down step attacks makes a binary game where either they are encumbered and suck, or not encumbered and are strong. I'm much more inclined that it be somewhere in between.

I'm not sure on the whole NS giving Flight yet. I'll have to test it out to see if the backstab ability is strong enough. I suspect it will be with damage buffs (including the still not nerfed Mass Frenzy), but we'll see after I test it out.

Yes, I do think draw limits are just a band aid fix, but the alternative requires a lot more work and iterating. Not sure the pay off for that work is really worth it.

 

I wish I had the time to test a lot. I'm going to vacations in a few days, alas. But the things I've said don't need testing, thinking is enough.

Do you mean they cannot before the latest encumber changes or after them? Since encumbrance always allows 1 movement for each move (including steps), you can play two Vibrant Pains and Surging Battleaxe to have 16 step attacks. Add the moves from your boots, shield and probably even skills, and you will move 3-4 squares per turn encumbered.

The step attacks were too powerful and outshadowed all the other attacks. If they won't get a countermeasure, this situation will remain. If encumber completely shuts down the step attacks, it isn't a "binary game", it's a base of the healthy metagame: encumber will defeat the step attacks, they will defeat something else who should, in turn, defeat encumber. With the latest changes, there is no hope for the healthy metagame anymore.

Damage isn't as important as ignoring zones of control. If you can jump over the enemy, he cannot run away anymore, even if he has a long move. This destroys the whole game IMHO.

 

No, thinking isn't enough for changes like this. Minor number changes maybe, but not system changes.

Sure, if they want to spend tons of cards just to move 1 each that's fine. Even with an amazing draw of 2 NS and a SSB they are moving a total of 4 (3+default move). That is also losing 8 damage and a block in the process. All the while an Elf could just move the same with a single card.

And no, that isn't a healthy metagame. You want all decisions, before and during, to be interesting and meaningful. A rock-paper-scissors done before the game starts isn't fun or a healthy meta.

Damage is important. And a step 2 doesn't stop you from moving away. Maybe Dwarves, but that assumes no other factors at all besides trading a default move for a step attack. Not a big deal.

And destroying the whole game? lol... Harness stacking, Cause Fumble / Defender's Block, and Lightning having Hard to Block and Penetrating destroys the game infinitely more times than these changes.

 

That's just sad -- and patently untrue. Instead of beating that dead, imaginary horse you might want to try addressing the repeatedly stated actual argument for why rapid access to the best items is problematic: the shortening of the game's lifespan (if the loot chase is to remain a significant part of the game).

Randimar's having 10 legendaries + 10 epics + 10 rares weekly and the new The Daily Deal 1+3+10 daily seems like a pretty good compromise between the conflicting item availability drives.

 

Ector, wtf man? Cause Fumble nerf does mean sth. A lot even. Pushing spells are far from being useless. And for draw limits, there's the infinitive draw deck.

About balance changes: <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3
17 legendaries per week is a lot better than 70, 1-2 per week was too little anyway <3
"we’re instead going to prevent Encumber from reducing any move below one move point.", " we’re going to roll back the change to Encumber stacking." <3
"You’ll now be able to target and affect impassable terrain." <3
"we’ve added a minor heal effect to each Cleansing card" <3
"Flight Aura: gets Keep on the Armor ability. Armor value reduced to 1 (from 2)." <3
"Nimble Strike: add Fly to Step ability. Damage reduced to 4 (from 6)." - very interesting. Can't be 100% sure what it will mean since it lost 1/3 of its damage but got a nice utility boost. I like it I agree that NS should be more than DC but shouldn't VT also be more than other step-1 attacks? Hard to give it any additional effects I think, so once more I suggest giving it an extra damage at least
"Cause Fumble: range reduced to 3 (from 6)." <3
"we’re doubling the [draw] limit to 10." <3

Thank you!

Harnesses are still weird. The only positive thing I see about them is that they give a buff to armor removal spells which I never bothered to run in MP before. Also the used-to-be most unique Harness, the Officer's one, is now by far the most pointless one and far from being special. Also, since there is no WW to reset the game and no big movements like step-4 NS or even slide 3+3 WoW, the game is slower, so there's more time to stack harnesses which means it's not a tiny difference whether they stack or not.

 

Who cares about the lost damage if your warrior is still getting closer to their wizard? When you reach the enemy, you will kill.

Right, but it's still much better than just rock, which is going to happen now. Now we'll see only "2 warr + priest" and "2 warr + wizard" teams.

Looks like you didn't understand me. Imagine you're playing in a narrow corridor (3 squares or less wide). Previously a player could play "hit-and-run" tactics, now that becomes impossible since the opponent can jump behind and his zone of control will prevent the retreat.

Definitely not. All these cards remained the same blocks, attacks and armor, just somewhat better or worse. None of these changes can be compared with zones of control negation.

 

"Who cares about the lost damage if your warrior is still getting closer to their wizard? When you reach the enemy, you will kill."
Are you kidding me? If you spend all your hand getting next to a wizard, they can either damage you quite a lot and/or push you away (often both) and you can't land a single damage on them. Or they can simply walk away lol. I'm not going to reply to your next messages, but these changes BM just announced are nice (thought I still can't agree with harness' logic ).

 

I may be too rude, but please answer one simply question: if somebody would hack your account and present you ALL the items in the game, would you leave the game immediately? No? Thanks a lot.
The item gathering is highly overvalued by the old players. The more items you have, the less is the value of "card-hunting" and the more is the value of MP, including the leagues and special rules tournaments. This game is "cardhunter" only for the newbies, and no Randimar restructure can change that.

Yes, 17 legendaries per week is better than 0-2 we have currently, but it's worse than 70 Believe me, if we could really buy 10 legendaries per day, nobody would buy all playable items - except for the newbies with fat wallets and little time. The only difference between 70 is 17 is the loss of these newbies, which IMHO is clearly bad for the game.
I really cannot understand the complains about the items availability with 70 legendaries per week. You like to get the items by hard way instead of buying them? Forget about Randimar and grind a lot then. You cannot afford buying all those goodies? Choose some of them you can afford. You're just jealous that somebody can buy the items you cannot afford? Really?
I was collecting a lot of items in my life. I was collecting stamps, postcards, beer bottles and many more. And if I ever encountered a shop with ALL collectibles I've needed, did I cry: "Stop! Stop selling these, since I want to get them myself!"? That would be just silly.

 

Please read my message #467 prior to writing such things.

I hope you don't consider this automatically gives you a last word in the discussion? Such behaviour is just childish, and there is even a special thread against it AFAIK

 

Or the lack of nerfs to old cards like MF and Dodge, and new cards like Cause Fumble and Deadly Spark. :-P But yes, the changes are interesting. I am curious how the new Encumber rule changes things -- as it should be a decent balancing act. Although I do agree that Humans get the raw end of the deal and definitely need some love. Elves have Trickery and Maneuvers, Dwarves have Toughness, Immovable, and Duck, and Humans have... Leadership?

I probably would once I reached #1 by 100+ Elo again unless there was some other incentive to keep playing. You under estimate the power of collecting, especially random collecting.

 

I use Perfect Command more often then Advanced Flexibility

 

Jarmo, if that was a response to my last post I think you missed the point I was trying to make. I wasn't suggesting that players who are only concerned with SP should be encouraged to play MP instead. I'm saying that if the goal of the Randimar changes is to encourage the players that are focused on MP to return to the game (by offering more access to items) then this strategy will fall short - because to get the most out of the latest version of Randimar's means you have to pay OR spend crazy amounts of time farming instead.

Having 2 versions of the shop is a great idea to appease the players who enjoyed the idea of working towards an item they see over the course of the week. My question is - is 1 legendary item per day enough to make the MP orientated players feel like they can take part in what they like to do (play MP) without feeling like the time would be better spent doing something else (ie, SP farming)?

Everyone plays for different reasons, the trick is to cater to all types. Obviously easier said than done.

 

I'll just pop in to point out that my CF/DB priest was often within range 3, and still well out of attack range. It's especially easy when you've got a smoke mage to suppress wizards. Vibrant Flying Pain-wielding warriors might be able to get at and kill the priest around his blocks now, if they can reach him before he gets his armor up, but that's a long shot.

So in short, the CF nerf still isn't much of a problem, and my universal-hate build should still be viable. I hate playing it though, so the practical proof is left as an exercise for the reader. ^_^

Also, WOOOOOOOOOOO, bursts can now target impassable terrain.