jobs Support Register

Balancing the Coin Flip

+

Lil_league

Poser
#1
Balancing the Coin Flip

What if the player who is going first draws 11 cards then he first chooses a card to go back to his deck which cannot come back out during the mulligan, this gives him a guaranteed blacklist then he can utilize his mulligan better and be more aggressive, both players still have 10 cards and this saves giving a player extra power to start a round with or an extra card which would be really bad.


 

Firekangaroo

Junior Member
#2
This would not solve the actual issue. You can total control over the tempo in round 1 when you go second because it's almost impossible to get card advantage or a good round 1 win for the player that had to go first if he passes first.
Giving one more Mulligan doesn't even help you that often, 3 is enough for most decks most of the time.
 

MoeC

Poser
#3
I do agree about who ever starts first get's an advantage but I don't think your idea is a solution :/
 

Skryba86

Junior Member
#4
I'd be more into the idea of the player who goes second getting one less mulligan. This might actually make his life harder, while a 4th mulligan for the player going first probably won't be all that meaningful.

Still not sure this is the right way to balance it, though. It's a tough subject when there are no turn to turn draws.
 

Lil_league

Poser
#5
Skryba86;n8992290 said:
I'd be more into the idea of the player who goes second getting one less mulligan. This might actually make his life harder, while a 4th mulligan for the player going first probably won't be all that meaningful.

Still not sure this is the right way to balance it, though. It's a tough subject when there are no turn to turn draws.
Its not a 4th Mully it looks that way but its putting a card back into deck that cant come out again during your 3 Mullies.
 

Lil_league

Poser
#6
Firekangaroo;n8991730 said:
This would not solve the actual issue. You can total control over the tempo in round 1 when you go second because it's almost impossible to get card advantage or a good round 1 win for the player that had to go first if he passes first.
Giving one more Mulligan doesn't even help you that often, 3 is enough for most decks most of the time.
The Coin Flip is actually a Non issue for 90% of the ladder, it's in tournaments and very high skill matches that the Flip matters, my suggestion aint a 4th Mully it may look that way but im saying you choose a card to go back into your deck and then you have your 3 mullies but the card you choose to go back cant come back out during Mulligan.
 

Skryba86

Junior Member
#8
Lil_league;n8993360 said:
Its not a 4th Mully it looks that way but its putting a card back into deck that cant come out again during your 3 Mullies.
Yeah, as has been stated, that's exactly what a mulligan is in gwent. Mulligans have a blacklist property to them in gwent, that makes it so the card you mulligan can't be drawn again during that mulligan phase.

What you're suggesting is essentially one mulligan before you get your 3 mulligans, which is exactly the same as a 4th mulligan.
 

Lil_league

Poser
#9
Didn't realize that mulligan cards were blacklisted and couldn't come back out, if that's the case then yes my suggestion is pointless.
 

Skryba86

Junior Member
#10
Yeah, you should really check the thread explaining mulligan in depth. The fact that there is black listing, and that mulliganed cards are shuffled back into your deck despite being blacklisted affects the order in which you should mulligan, depending on what you want to redraw earlier on.

Basically if you want to mulligan a card and don't want to redraw it at all, you should mulligan it last, and not first, as the first mulliganed card has the greater odds of being redrawn earlier, the second has a bit less probability of being redrawn, and the last one has the least probability.

In the other hand, if it's a bronze we're talking about, you may want to mulligan it first anyway, because of the black listing, so that you don't redraw a second copy of it.

As for the suggestion, maybe reducing by 1 the amount of mulligans allowed for the player who goes second could make sense. Not sure.
 

Uncle_Woody

Junior Member
#12
I think the player that wins the flip does have a bit of an advantage. An extra card would be overkill. How about a booster for the guy who loses? Just thinking out loud
 

TMKennelly

Junior Member
#14
I like the idea of an extra mulligan to fix the disadvantage of "winning" the coin flip. However I think that a single extra mulligan before round one isn't quite enough as fairly often I don't need all three of the mulligan opportunities anyway (and such an event negates the balance). Couple this with the fact that actually going first in round one is not just a disadvantage in round one but in the whole game as the opponent can play reactively, win round one, control round two and have the last say in round 3 or just generate card advantage by passing.

I think it is considered that "losing" the coin flip equates to a 0.5 card advantage so as a balance suggestion I would give the "winner" an extra mulligan that they can use in any three of the mulligan opportunities between rounds. The extra ability to trade a situationally useless card for a valuable one throughout the game seems like it would equate to 0.5 card advantage to me and could be potent enough to balance the coin flip issue (we all know our win to loss ratio is much higher when we go second). Two good examples that spring to mind are the ability to mulligan a card in round three if playing witchers / crones with one in hand in the knowledge that if you draw a second you have another opportunity to get rid of it and the ability to search for a spy in round two / three after winning round one but going down in card advantage.

Just a thought, might not be suitable but let me know what you think.
 

burek18

Junior Member
#15
So since this is the latest coinflip suggestion thread that isn't locked, I'll just post my suggestion here: Initiator tag.

So what the initiator tag does, is it adds something extra to the card if it gets played on an empty board (both sides of the board have no units). For example:


Dol Blathana Marksman: Initiator: Play this card face down. When a unit appears on the opposite side, flip and trigger deploy. (it becomes an ambush unit when played first! PogChamp )
Celaeno Harpy: Initiator: Spawn an additional egg. ( I know, a potential extra 8 points)
Mahakam Defender: Initiator: Timer 2: At end of turn, move a unit to a different row. (somewhat like a bouncer)
Impera Brigade: Initiator: Give this unit a shield.
etc, etc


This does not mess with card advantage and adds points to you if going first in a more interesting way.
 

FG15-ISH7EG

Junior Member
#16
I really like this idea. It gives the first played card something special, but at the same time doesn't make decks, who want to go first too strong.
Furthermore, I think the units should not include golds, such that Initiator helps against spell decks, too.

Concering the cards, I wouldn't choose Celaeno Harpy and Mahakam Defender, because they are units with a big carry-over, so it isn't that bad to play them at the start of a round, even if your opponent passes. A similar case with Impera Brigade, because it is a unit with a long term effect, which makes it pretty good to play it first.

Therefore I would give the initiator tag only to units, which have neither carry-over nor an effect that gets stronger the longer they are on the board. Also I think your idea for the DB Marksman is great, because damage dealing units are kind of helpless going first, or other units which require a lot of setup. But because it is a unit with a longterm effect, I would give it to the DB Archers

Units I think would be a good candidate for the Initiator tag are
Monsters:
- Nekker Warrior: Use the ability on the first bronze unit in your deck.
- Ice Giant: Gain a shield of 2
-Wild Hunt Warrior: Boost self by 2
-Ekkimara: Strengthen Self by 3

NG:
-Nauzica Standard Bearer: Reveal a random bronze card in your hand and boost it by 2.
-Fire Scorpion: Gain a timer of 2 and use your ability at a random enemy, when the timer expires
-Vicorvaro Novice: Play a spying unit from your hand, then draw a new card

NR:
-Tridam Infantryman: Increase armour by 1
-Blue Stripes Scout: Reveal the lowest card from your opponents hand
-Reaver Scout: Play a copy of a unit in your hand, then reveal the unit in your hand.

Scioa'tel
-DB Archer: Play this card face down. When a unit appears on the opposite side, flip and damage it by 3
-DB Protector: Gain a shield
-Dwarven Skirmisher: Boost by 2

Skellige:
-Clan Heymaey Skald: Boost all units in your Graveyaard by 1
-Clan An Craite Warcrier: Damage 3 units in your hand by 1
-Clan Drummond Shieldmaiden: Strengthen all other Clan Drummond Shieldmaidens by 1
 

Skryba86

Junior Member
#17
I really like the idea, it's exactly the sort of thing I'd suggested in some other topic, basically give better incentive to play first by creating cards that are actually good to be played before any other.

But, wow, FG15-ISH7EG, I disagree with the big majority of your suggestions xD

You wanna give an incentive to playing first by giving a half decent ability to units that are much more valuable played later? Why would you look at it like this? Why would you want the player to commit to wasting a valuable late game unit to play it upfront so he can have a meh ability?

I believed it should be the entire way around. Just make cards that are actually good when played early on, slightly better if played upfront as the first card on the battlefield. The idea is to give an incentive to the first player, to give him some sort of advantage that mitigates the loss of having to play first. You don't want to force him into an ugly decision in the process.

Cards like Reaver Hunter (a valuable deck finisher that would never be played upfront in the deck he's used in, unless his ability was simply bonkers and it would be too strong then, most likely) , shield maidens (an extremely valuable swing unit and deck thinner that would never be played alone for just +2 power), ekimara (whose whole point is to carry over big power, and would be a measly 6 power resilient who'd never be played like that because it's a waste of its potential) are far too valuable as late/mid game tools. You don't wanna force the player who goes first to "waste" these units so they can take advantage of their supposed advantage for playing first, otherwise you might as well not give them any advantage to begin with, IMO.

But the idea itself I'd definitely get behind, although it would need proper testing in order for it to not be too strong (also, should it be limited to the first unit played on T1? Or first unit played on either turn? Because the latter might be a little to favorable for decks who don't mind going first and always wanna win T1, giving them too much of a boost).
 

FG15-ISH7EG

Junior Member
#19
Yeah, probably not all of my ideas where that great, but I didn't find it that easy to find fitting cards for each faction.
Of course cards, who profit from going first, like Havka Smuggler or Savage Bear shouldn't have the tag Initiator. The same for cards, which damage an enemy by 2, when you mulligan/discard/reveal a unit, because they profit, too.
Furthermore, cards which have a direct(resilent) or indirect (handbuffing/deckbuffing) carry-over shouldn't have an Initiator tag either, because their carry-over already gives you an advantage in the next rounds, so you can pass mach easier.
Do you agree so far with me?
What I find much more difficult are cards, which give you an advantage later in the same round, like Kaedweni Siege Expert, or Impera Brigade. Probably they can be ok with an Initiator tag, and it was wrong to exclude them. It is probably even justified to give some of them the tag, because they suffer the most from short rounds, because of all the setup.

The reason I included some units like the Shieldmaiden, is that I thought also of round 2 and 3, when the player sometimes has only very few units left, and such has to use a unit, which would have been much greater if used later.

What would you think about giving all Weather Clearing Units the Initiator tag? It would make them much more usefull, when playing against decks with no or few weathereffects.
 

Skryba86

Junior Member
#20
FG15-ISH7EG;n9201881 said:
Yeah, probably not all of my ideas where that great, but I didn't find it that easy to find fitting cards for each faction.
Of course cards, who profit from going first, like Havka Smuggler or Savage Bear shouldn't have the tag Initiator. The same for cards, which damage an enemy by 2, when you mulligan/discard/reveal a unit, because they profit, too.
Furthermore, cards which have a direct(resilent) or indirect (handbuffing/deckbuffing) carry-over shouldn't have an Initiator tag either, because their carry-over already gives you an advantage in the next rounds, so you can pass mach easier.
Do you agree so far with me?
What I find much more difficult are cards, which give you an advantage later in the same round, like Kaedweni Siege Expert, or Impera Brigade. Probably they can be ok with an Initiator tag, and it was wrong to exclude them. It is probably even justified to give some of them the tag, because they suffer the most from short rounds, because of all the setup.

The reason I included some units like the Shieldmaiden, is that I thought also of round 2 and 3, when the player sometimes has only very few units left, and such has to use a unit, which would have been much greater if used later.

What would you think about giving all Weather Clearing Units the Initiator tag? It would make them much more usefull, when playing against decks with no or few weathereffects.
But I don't really think the initiator tag should trigger in round 2 and 3. It'd become too hard to balance, when what you really want to do is give a good advantage to the player going first on T1, which is where the big disadvantage is at. T2 and T3 you don't really need to have such an advantage, IMO, as you already either dictated the pace of the game, or managed to get your CA, and it should be up to you to save up a good T2 play and a good T3 plan.

With that in mind, cards that are good late game tools shouldn't be given the tag, IMO. And while I agree that the obvious first play units should probably not have the tag, I'll also say that in order for this to actually work, you'd need to make the initiatior tag abilities good enough to warrant changing your gameplan for them (aka, actually not dropping the arachas behemoth, or the savage bear, or the 2dmg units from archetype triggers).

The best options to balance this out would probably be units which have good all around purpose, exactly like the impera brigade.

As for the weather clearing units, don't think it'd be the best option either. I, for one, just wish these units would be completely reworked into weather synergy units, instead of weather clearing (as with the current weather I don't think we actually need them). But if they do stay, they serve a very specific purpose, IMO. Although it might give them another use, which would make them more versatile.