[Feedback] Upcoming Balance Change MEGATHREAD

I don't hate the keep harnesses, I'd prefer to try to reduce the amount of reliable armor they provide. If enchanted harness did something other than add to your armor rolls that would possibly be enough. You'd have to stack a lot more leather harnesses to get the same effect, and since that's only armor 1 it wouldn't work as well either.

Deadly spark is trickier. All the sparks have the block penalty, so t makes since that deadly and potent spark have it too. But once a spark has both hard to block and penetrating it's just a straight clock on a warriors life total. Since they can't block it or armor up, they have X sparks until they die. This is why the best approach is to add a damage buff to the wizard, it shortens the clock further and is a simple 2 card combo. You can kill humans and elves down in 3 buffed sparks, which is nuts.

Frankly i don't think wizards need these penetrating attacks. They're the class with the most anti-armor options, is it really the worst thing for a wizard team to have to run some armor removal? I know some argue that it's bad for a meta where they have to take it, but I don't see it that way. If wizards don't have to dedicate some of their arcane slots to things like armor removal, it makes it too easy for them to stay dedicated to control selections.

 

Maybe these penetrating sparks could instead get +2 range instead? That wouldn't be as good though and I actually didn't mind them getting (significantly) better but penetration seems a little weird. +1 damage would also be weird since then there would be two 7-damage sparks and no 5-damage ones.

Edit: What about 6 damage Deadly Spark and 8 damage Potent Spark (and no penetration then)? I can't see any item with Potent Spark getting too good.

 

Perhaps change the name to Static Charge, keep the damage (maybe drop it a bit?), lose the penetrating and have it apply a 1-2 turn secondary effect that would hit the target for say 3 electric damage for every armor card in their hand at the start of the round? I would tend to agree that Wizards should be forced to look to the armor removal already in their arsenal instead of being handed a long range mid-high damage spell with hard to block and penetration.

On a brighter and somewhat entertaining note with the new change to encumber, dodge might actually be a card that is worth keeping around instead of a card that I largely ignored since the start of the game. It almost makes the Elven skills with Dodge on them playable..... not quite but almost. Sorta like when Scuttle went from completely useless to potentially game changing

Do have a nice helm with Dodge and Sprint Team tho <3

 

Dodge is one of the best cards in the game, even before the changes. Feleran used to stack as many as he could in ranked and did extremely well due to it. I always ran one or two on my characters as well simply because the potential card advantage it brings is insane depending on the map.

 

A few thoughts about sparks:

- Penetrating sparks seem op but I could win against them on the test server with a melee team. Sparks make camping VP squares much more dangerous, but as control has been heavily nerfed, a melee team can go for the kill instead without much opposition, at least not as much as before.

- Also, sparks don't work well with Squeamish, which makes very dangerous to include the best control items as Sensate's Ring and Runestone. They can run other items with GoW or WoW without Squeamish, but without traits the build becomes more unstable.

- I don't like a 6 and a 5 damage attack with range 6, penetrating and hard to block, but I'm afraid that if we remove the penetrating keyword (and if control stays as it is after the last changes) there won't be much reasons to play wizards other than Punishing Bolt or easy access to armor removal spells.

 

Depending on the map and on the random(less) Dodge sometimes can resolve the match all alone, especially if you are not playing long range attacks. I think it should at least be like Altruism, with "Keep Unless 4".

 

I'm confused as to why cause fumble and defensive block were given "ignore facing" on top of getting upgrades in other ways. "Ignore facing" should be a very, very rare ability since it removes gameplay elements. Toughness itself gets a lot of complaints, and probably should be limited to one per deck, but at least it is limited to two per deck, can be countered with anti-armor, and can't be used from distance.

You can have 9 cause fumble and 2 defensive block in a single deck, all ignoring facing. They can be used by someone behind a sight-blocking wall, and looking the opposite direction. It makes no sense. Surely they would be extremely good cards with the upgraded rolls and card drawing, without needing to remove a gameplay element? Trying to get the block holder to turn the wrong direction would be much more interesting.

 

Yeah a bit confused why they removed the facing. I guess they felt it wasn't triggering as consistently as they would have liked. Tho in fairness while having 9 Cause Fumbles could potentially devastate warrior builds it does literally nothing vs a mage build. So there would be some significant risks to overspecializing a priest with a bunch of Cause Fumbles.

Tho I wouldn't be surprised if you see a bunch of warriors roaming around with 2 defensive blocks per for a total of 6 for the pack.

 

I agree that blocks shouldn't have the "ignores facing" thing. How can someone block from behind - he can't even see the attack :S

But I know why it was added: to make it clearer when does the roll trigger. Before, by reading the effect, it wasn't sure who has to be facing who to be able to block.

 

After stepping away for a couple of days and letting the new changes set in, I have to say that my initial disappointment to the decision of reverting Randimar's back to weekly remains.

Forgive me for echoing myself here but at this point I think its probably a good idea for BM to clearly outline the goals that they hope to accomplish by these new changes so that we can ensure we are effectively attacking the problem areas and not inadvertently adding new ones in the process.

For instance, I thought that a major goal was to increase the activity in the MP lobby. Is this correct?

If so then again I have to strongly advise that you reconsider the newest changes to Randimar's. With 10 legendary items in a weekly shop you may as well be forcing your pvp-orientated portion of players to pay real $ or farm SP as a first priority (something that has in-part with the lack of balance changes already turned them away from the game in the first place). MP orientated players want to play MP. It is incredibly important that we make sure we are rewarding these players for playing the game how they choose to.

The single player campaign is challenging and fun the first time around but I think we can all agree that farming SP after you have already completed it presents much less of a challenge and this only compounds the more your item pool increases.

Put simply, if you are a new or returning pvp-focused-player and your primary interest is to open yourself up to more options then it doesn't take long to realise you are shooting yourself in the foot if you don't farm SP like mad. If Randimar's remains this way then expect to see more players focusing on just playing single player missions - just please don't assume when you look at the data side of it that they are doing this because they enjoy it and don't like to play MP.

The new 1 legendary per day shop is not a consolation either. In fact it possibly makes the situation worse. Now while your spending all of your time farming for that 1 or 2 guaranteed items that you desire from Randi's each week you are also tempted with a new one each day, meaning you could be spending even more time farming SP to ensure that you pick up what you were already working towards!

Games like league of legends show that it is feasible to implement a business model that focuses primarily on cosmetic transactions but if your spending all of your time playing single player then don't expect people to buy skins, there is no point if you cant show them off.

Why not make everyone happy and have 5 legendaries in a weekly shop and around 4 in a daily version. I say around 4 but the most important thing is it needs to be high enough that it can cycle and alleviate the strong urge that will compel players to take advantage of the weekly deals by grinding SP - or suffering the consequences. Only then will you see your MP lobby filled with players of all collection sizes.

 

Having 4 in a daily shop doesn't fix what you're suggesting of pushing the game into a multiplayer focus. Having a very well balanced game with reasons to keep playing and unlocking things is a reason for multiplayer to exist. Right now, the format isn't really for that (save for leagues which are generally really luck based in fixed decks).

Most of the Card Hunter player base has focused on single player, but to create a game that continues to generate capital past an initial Basic Edition you need to create a healthy competitive environment that rewards continual play and improvement. Unfortunately, the direction they are currently heading with the balance changes and shop changes seem to reward SP farming and having good items more than it does learning the game and deploying strategies. But that's just my view on the matter.

 

To be clear, I'm suggesting having 4 in a daily shop makes it so the items cycle fast enough to allow pvp focused players to persue the avenue of the game they wish to (which is play MP) without being compelled to farm single player for fear of missing out. To me that really does fix the problem because it basically allows players to concentrate on what they want to do at all times. Maybe your right and 4 a day isn't enough, to me it is though.

Based on data alone it is easy to think that most of the player base is primarily in it for the SP aspect (as it could be interpreted that way) but by doing so the devs are (imo) falsely coming to conclusion that players prefer SP over MP. Like you said, its just the way the game is currently set up. I totally agree with you.

Believe me, I agree that balancing the game is of the utmost importance and will definitely improve the situation (given time and a constant commitment - I'm still confident they will achieve this) but as long as they so heavily reward SP farming over MP participation the problem will persist, regardless of how balanced the game is.

 

Sorry, but how are they "so heavily rewarding SP farming"?
*EDIT* What I am referring to is the Randimar's change. Having more items in the shop DOES NOT equal rewarding SP farming, that was my point. */EDIT*

From what I've heard, playing Leagues is supposed to be a no-brainer , to encourage players to enter MP, and keep coming back.

If you think that offering more legendaries in shops is supposed to "heavily reward SP farming" you're totally wrong, as others have pointed out.

As for Cause Fumble, it comes on items like Choking/Foul Incense, which indicated that the nature of the cause to fumble may be due to a bad smell, which would not require facing.

For Defender's Block, I have no idea. I'm sure there is an easy fix, applying the card draw /blocking effect to allies only, etc.

 

How are they heavily rewarding SP farming? By Randimar offering 10 legendary items and giving you a week to come up with the gold to pay for them. I highly doubt that anyone will be able to do it by selling what they get and don't need from playing MP. The time investment needed would be so much greater than just farming SP.

Sorry, I should have clarified that by MP I mean by using your customised party for the REAL multiplayer experience. Leagues might be fun for a while (and a good way to get random loot) but its a novelty by comparison don't you think? Maybe you don't agree but its not the experience I am wanting from this game. I want to use "my" party and I really don't think I am alone by that sentiment.

It may seem silly (and I know I'm not going to win friends in this community by harping on about this) but this will be a deal-breaker for those who don't like to grind. I'll leave it at that unless anyone wants me to go deeper. So one last time, BM, please consider the implications of leaving the situation as it is now. Balance is an ongoing issue but its highly unlikely that they will change the way the shops operate once it hits live.

 

Gold is much harder to get in MP than it is in SP due to the rate at which items (to be sold) and treasure are acquired. They really need to increase the MP drops for casual players and increase MP gold output.

Psychologically, people are more likely to spend money on a game the more they are invested and feel that they can gain something from it. At the moment there is little reason to actually give money and get pizza outside of the Basic Edition and maybe another month of membership. The changes to shops are intending to tempt people who don't want to farm SP the ability to buy pizza to convert to gold to buy individual legendaries, but I'm not sure that's the best methodology for getting people to spend money. I've gone over a pretty detailed marketing plan that would encourage pizza purchase more heavily with Jon, but some of the highlights are more cosmetic abilities (player avatars instead of just the basic knight helm), ability to "re-roll" shops, and increased pizza-to-gold conversion rates that actually make converting from pizza-to-gold not feel like a horrible deal. He went ahead with one of them (reducing chest pizza price) and a few others, but there are definitely ways to make people focus more on spending money and/or playing multiplayer instead of simply farming SP for whatever they want.

 

That's a good question. I don't know which side should be catered to, but only BM knows who they make more money off of; SP, or MP. I, personally, have only played SP and I've spent at least $100 over the last year buying the packs, miscellaneous pizza, and club membership. You are assuming MP is the priority because that is what you favor. We don't know what they favor and I'd be surprised if they shared that.

It's only not challenging to min/maxers. As I've said in the past I try weird things to see if I can beat certain adventures differently. For example, there's a thread that brings out the idea of 'Aristocat' for MP. (Which is basically making a party that can only equip legendary items.) I created one that was 1-1-1 and had good success with it. Lately I've gotten more Arcane Legendary items so I made a 1 priest/2 wizard group. I couldn't beat Cardstock II with it. I don't think I've ever failed Cardstock II with any group until last night. The campaign is only as challenging as you make it.

Part of my SP play is role playing. I buy new skins for that since I don't expect all of my characters to be twins/triplets, etc... Just because you play SP doesn't mean you don't buy skins.

I don't know what the exact numbers should be, but why would these specific numbers make everyone happy? I like the current set up for reasons stated earlier in the thread. I don't think having more daily items and less weekly items is any better than having what is currently proposed. Until we know BM strategy on this, there's not much we can do but speculate and haggle over numbers.

 

The unfortunate reality is that MP is where the money lies in free-to-play games. How many single player focused F2P games do you know that are massively successful? I can name about dozens F2P that focus on MP (League of Legends, Dota 2, Team Fortress 2, World of Tanks, Hearthstone, Hawken, MechWarrior Mercs, Planetside 2, and tons and tons of MMORPGs), but can't really think of any that focus on SP. There might be some, but it isn't the same -- the level of replayability just isn't there for most people to be interested and stay with it. The only SP F2P games I can think of that do well are for mobile (Candy Crush, Plants vs Zombies 2, Puzzle & Dragons) and even there the biggest ones are multiplayer (Clash of Clans).

If SP is something they wanted to focus on for money I'm sure there would be MUCH better ways of delivering on that... but it seems SP is just the bait and MP is the real hook. At least that's my interpretation of it.

 

Setting aside the reward-for-money question, I think the MP-vs-SP rewards thread decided that leagues blow everything else away in terms of reward-for-effort. It seems like even casual players are able to take advantage of leagues, so I'm not sure it needs too much of a boost. The top-level MP players also get to enjoy the rewards from tournaments and other contests, however infrequent they may be.

Over in the SP world, I'm pretty close to halting farming because it's so boring, even though I've picked up plenty of GP and even a few choice items over the last few weeks. I just completed the last quest, so there's not a whole lot left for me to do in CardHuntria except chase the loot fairy.

*shrug* Maybe if common/uncommon/rare treasure values were increased (say to 5/20/60), there would be more GP available in MP, and SP farming wouldn't be such an endless grind. Increasing the pizza > gold conversion rate would probably also satisfy casual players.

 

This is the biggest problem with the game right now. If there were something to build towards in single player besides completing a collection, increasing Randimar rates would sting less. I also agree that something needs to be added to multiplayer rewards to make playing it more appealing. It is a major bummer when you lose a hard fought 20 min game and get nothing to show for it.

 

Thinking about this more... 1 pizza = $0.03 (at the lowest tier), so if a legendary costs 2500 GP, then a conversion rate of 1 pizza = 25 GP offers the ability to purchase a specific legendary for 100 pizza = $3.00 and a specific epic for 20 pizza = $0.60. I'm fine with that sort of purchasability to help out new players. That also makes the gold leagues effectively cost 2 pizza, for players without time to farm.