Community Balancing Act

Wait, you don't judge Wall of Stone being dominant there but you judge WW/WWE being dominant in normal? Wha...?

Didn't I tell you Jon was working on balance? It is something that will probably be implemented when the season is over as to not disrupt it too heavily.

 

Surely having Barge in your deck is punishment enough. (I know, I know, it's probably people using Whiteglow Flail.)

 

For the nonce, setting aside certain hours per day to run particular deck styles might be an option. It would require the voluntary cooperation of all the PVP players, but the ones I've met and played impress me as a pretty good bunch. The big hurdle would be getting the word out to everyone. An often-repeated blurb in the chat box might do the trick. Announcing a "Peasant Hour" a day or two ahead of time might be a good way to guage reactions. Everyone should be able to field a decent peasant build, so it shouldn't really exclude anyone.
Top-Tier might be excluded due to the competative nature, but everone else could have fun with it.
Edit: A PVP 'Community Announcement' board on MP island would be great for this kind of thing.

 

Not what I said. I said I won't judge the use of whirlwind on those maps because whirlwind is necessitated by the dominance of wall of stone.

 

There is no way i can follow this before season ends! You know i agree, but i just cant! Couldnt you have waited with this for another two weeks?


PS, Please put nimbus in the list! That card isnt as popular but has NOTHING at all to do in MP. Same with short ppray

EDIT: A fun solution would be to fix the matching so you wouldnt be able to match with someone that did not have "unfair cards" if you did yourself. Im pretty sure people would start buiding alternativly pretty quick

 

Except why not move to ban Wall of Stone and WW/WWE on those maps then? Why only move to ban WW on maps not dominated by Wall of Stone? It seems like a double standard to say one is problematic but not the other on specific maps.

 

Great point. Let's keep everything.

 

Simpler to start with one thing, if you want to organize players to reject Wall of Stone on those league maps that seems cool to me. But again everything here is kind of moot as the battle is won and Jon is working on balance things. I can't wait to hear what he has to say on the topic!

 

Me neither! I expect great clamor and uproar, shouts of exuberance, wailing and gnashing of teeth! Demon Snuffboxes for EVERYONE! WOOT! WOOT!
I'll be greatly surprised if I'm not PO'd by some of the changes.
Then we can all start new lists of cards we don't like.

 

I made a minor edit to my post. It's sweet and all of Jon to adopt a "the player is always right" attitude about these things, and to be so generous with the "if it's in the game, you can't blame players for using it" approach, but it's also totally unnecessary, and probably wrong. It's a social competitive game, and the community can fine-tune its relationship to the various parts of the game at its leisure. People don't need to take advantage of everything available to them, especially if hurts others. For gratuitous example, bankers can do all kinds of basically legal crap to people that ruins their lives; should we not judge them for acting dishonorably?

In any event, nothing in this thread was counterproductive, except maybe for Stexe and me joking with each other about running forum posts by the devs.

And to whoever made the uninformed comment earlier about the game not being a democracy... everything is a democracy, just waiting to happen. People always can, and should, group together to rise up against the abuses of the powerful few

To any Sorcererers watching, remember the tools at your disposal. They may be necessary in the future.

 

Sign me in!

 

Yea, I'll boycott these cards until a nerf is in place also. However, is there some clarification in what we should expect the nerfs to be. It's a bit difficult to run through *hundreds* of varying suggestions on this forum.

 

Nope. But check Jon's post earlier in the discussion, he stated BM is working on balance and will have a word on this soon. I'm pretty sure a blog post about their take on things will be published in a matter of days.

 

I want to say that a participation prize will get me to play MP. But it probably won't.

 

Nope. If Jon wanted to simply ban you and every player for no reason he could do it within his legal right (according to the Terms of Service you agreed to). You could probably cause a PR storm and cost him some money, but it isn't a democracy and it isn't "waiting to happen." And since you were abusing the system he would have even more of a right to ban you. Capitalism is not democracy. You can "vote" with your wallet, but it isn't the same.

 

And we could build a jank version of the game in HTML 5 in a week. I like Jon's version of the game better, but. Ways and means.
Also, when did I actually abuse a system?
You're obsessed!

 

It depends greatly on what you consider counterproductive. Nothing in this thread was counterproductive to your immediate goal, I'm not sure the statement can stand in general though.

I saw this thread yesterday and immediately disliked the idea but did not have time to post, so I guess this is my post-facto post.

Poor Means: @Flaxative I really like what you do for the community and I think you generally have really good ideas, but I'm not sure this one was one of them. There are real abuses that happen in MP and by flooding the devs with abuse reports it makes the real abuses get lost and creates a lot of extra unnecessary work for the devs. This is neither an appropriate way to thank them for all the phenomenal changes and additions that they have been working on and producing for us (I think its time we make another list of all the great things they have done in the past few months), nor is it a good way to free up their time to continue to effect positive changes (including balance).

But it produced results: Now the appearance on the surface is that this approach has "finally" produced results in getting the devs to work on balance when nothing else has. This is simply not the case. Jon's response:

does not mean that he all of a sudden was inspired to work on balance issues, it can simply mean that he already was. In fact it seems clear that they have already been working on balance. Pushback Parry and Sparkling Cloth Armor were clear attempts to mitigate NS without a direct change to the card or to existing items. It was appropriate for the devs to watch to see how those effected the meta before moving forward with more changes - but it indicates they were already looking at and thinking about balance. However, now for many in the CH community a "report boycott" appears to be an effective way to get what you want. I'm guessing that wasn't the intention, but @Flaxative as Party Leader you are in a position where many players will follow your lead and now their eyes have been opened to the "means" to get what they want.

Its not all about winning: -> You taught me that. One of the many things I have appreciated from your approach to the game is that the game is about having fun. After Stexe and Paladin's builds were posted earlier I went and thought I'd see what similar build I could put together. I don't have VP but I made the best approximation with what I have. When I was done I took one look at the build and thought to myself, "boring!" I never even tried it, it didn't look like fun to me. I'm in the 1500s, don't us VP or WW and am perfectly happy where I'm at. Sometimes I face them, sometimes I don't, sometimes I win, sometimes I don't. It doesn't really matter to me. If someone wants to play a super competitive build and fight fiercely for top position, having the stress of trying to keep the top, and the boringness of being stuck with only one build, let them have it. If I eventually get a VP I'll probably use it, but until then I don't care if I go up against someone else who has it. If I win, that much more impressive, if I lose, no big deal - I played my deck that I enjoy to the best of my ability. There's always going to be cards I hate to see, but I'm not going to let them ruin my fun.

So ultimately I do think this thread and idea was counterproductive to the future of CH even if not to the immediate end of getting balance changes. This might be an overly harsh critique, but I'm calling it as I see it. Nothing personal at you Flak, I think you'll still do many more great things to help the CH community. It's just in this particular case I think you jumped without looking.

 

SCA made NS even more important since if opp has it you need more NS as well.

 

*grumbles something about lulzing and ragequitting before it was cool*

Now I gotta find a new schtick since all the hipsters have jumped on board.