Balancing the Coin Flip

[eternum_turlte]

I have been thinking of the first player having a card that reads " boost all your units by 1 , (this card cannot be discarded or maligned)" spawned into his hand after 3 turns of the first round, if the card isn't played in round 1 it will just be banished out of the game like it never existed.

this change will give the first player a very slight advantage if the first round went long enough and will not give him card advantage for the first turns 3 .

 

[DziejopisWawel]

Solution for coinflip

Player who start second draw 8 cards instead of 10, at the start of round secon he draws 4 cards instead of 2, it promote first player in first round which is importand round in game

 

[Draconifors]

DziejopisWawel Thread merged. This one has several coin flip ideas, added yours to the list.

 

[Kinglionsfox]

I have an idea for the coin flip. It's also flexible to tweak. The person going first has their leader boosted by 5 points, an arbitrary amount for now. Or give the leader an extra ability that spawns a token when it's played of 5 strength, on the same row as the leader is played on. Or the leader could spawn 3 tokens with 2 strength. Or give the spawned token(s) a little ability like the Fire Elemental's Tokens. Also, you could have a specific token for the specific faction/leader too, so that it can be balanced to the faction/leader.

 

[Cardzilla]

A Viable Coin Flip Suggestion

• [h=6]Opening Discussion:[/h]
  The coin flip in Gwent often gives whoever has to play the opening card a statistical disadvantage towards winning the overall match. Obviously outliers exist, but as proven by the recent Gwentscom tournament (which involved top players) where the opening player lost 72% of the time, something is going on due to the nature of how reactive and proactive play happens with Gwent cards. The worst part is that it has created a stigma around the coin flip in the entire community. Some will say that is the nature of coin flips, but you cannot compare those games/sports just because they all have a coin flip. Most suggestions say just give some sort of bonus to the opening player. But people that want to go first do exist, so then you are giving those people a double bonus. This multi-faceted suggestion will take that into account, as well as the statistical advantage people going 2nd get, while also hoping to alleviate the stigma around the coin flip to the general player base.

  ---

• [h=6]Creating a Yes/No choice mechanic:[/h]
  This overall suggestion needs to open with creating a mechanic where people can say if they want to go first or not. As stated above, people that want to go first do exist, so need to prevent them from getting a bonus of any kind. Usually people know whether they are satisfied opening the round after the mulligan phase, so nothing happens until after each player goes through their mulligan options. After this happens, a Gaunter O'Dimm type graphic opens for both players that shows 2 cards that both players will select. These cards will say 'YES' or 'NO' with a header above asking if you want to go first. The combination of options can only yield 3 different outcomes that will then decide if a bonus is given to anyone.
  • If both players select yes, a standard 50/50 coin flip will then happen. Someone will win, but they will not be given any bonus. Their benefit will be that they are going in the position that they wanted. While the other player may have selected they they wanted to go first, their benefit will be that they are now able to play their cards in a reactive nature, which has tended to yield a statistical advantage in the past
  • If the choice is split between yes/no, then there will not be a bonus for any player because one gets to go first like they wanted, and the other will get to go 2nd like they wanted. The coin flip here will be ceremonial in nature only
  • Things get interesting when both say 'NO' and that outcome merits its own paragraph

  ---

• [h=6]What happens in a both players select "NO" outcome:[/h]
  A typical coin flip will happen in this outcome, but someone will now be forced to go first, while the other player is now placed in the statistically more beneficial position. The person going first will now be given a bonus, but this bonus will not happen until after the other player has passed. For context, think of how Toruviel flips over in the end. How this will work is that the last active unit card (cannot be basic last card because it may be removed) that player 1 placed on the board will get a passive arbitrary bonus added to the total. I cannot give you an exact number for this bonus as I do not have any access to any data. However, CDPR can easily determine what would be a good amount for this bonus when they pour over their statistics. The player going 2nd will have to take that into account and possible drawbacks could be:
  • Playing a card they had hoped to save
  • Losing the round (often times the outcome of this round will determine future strategies)
  • Winning the round but by a greater card disadvantage than they wanted

  ---

To summarize, install a binary choice system to where only someone forced to lead off the match is given a bonus, which would be an arbitrary number only CDPR could come up with after analyzing their data. And that passive bonus is added to the last active unit on the board, like Toruviel if need the additional context. The goal is to not only lessen the stigma on the coin flip, but counter the advantage for getting to go second in the opening.

 

[MooshieMooshie]

This suggestion seems overly complicated in that it's trying to solve a problem that doesn't really exist. No deck wants to go first. There are decks where people think it's good to go first, but I haven't seen a single one of these decks where going first actually gives them a higher win % than going second. Going second is pretty much objectively better. Perhaps there are some really fringe gambit decks that would want to go first for some reason, but there's probably no need to balance around those. There may be people who WANT to go first, but that does not mean that they actually gain some advantage from going first. Unless you have stats for a certain deck that is more favored if it goes first.

 

[4RM3D]

The general consensus is that going first is bad, even if some niche deck can work with it. When the player who goes first received a small bonus, no one will really complain about it. So, let's keep it simple. I haven't thought it out completely, but something that might work is just giving that player a bronze 4 strength token. When that player passes he is given the option to use the token (and only after the pass). This means it cannot be used for card advantage, but it can prevent a dry pass in round 2 or give a small bonus in round 3.

 

[Mnorojo]

Fixing Coin toss during beta

I am enjoying the game and dont really have issues with the new patch. It keeps the game fresh and exciting and allows for the rise and fall of different factions.

Anyhow, one thing that still troubles me is the coin toss. It really has a huge impact on whether I win or lose a match due to CA. I know people have talked this point to death already, but nothing ever changes. So we have to keep making an issue out of it to let CDPR know that it has to be fixed.

I'm of the opinion that the most effective way to address the issue is to give the person who goes first extra points. These are points that will be added to the first player's score after both players have passed in the second round, but only if the first player lost the first round. So the first player does not get them in the event of a draw or first round win. The question then is how many points are enough? 5 seems like a good place to start. If it ends up being too much then it could be scaled back to 4 or 3. In any event, the second player will still have the advantage of going second in the third round.

This will eliminate the unfair CA created by playing first and losing the first round. The 1st player can now enter the third round without having had to burn a card in the 2nd round. Or if the second player decides to play the second round through, it will be harder to get the win. This will also make it easier for players to at least win one round and enjoy the rewards that come with it. Because honestly, there is nothing worse than getting steamrolled two rounds in a row, especially for beginners who have weak decks.

To reiterate, if the first player wins the first round, then there are no points, no changes. Only if the player loses.

Of course carryover from the second player can overcome the five point advantage and force another card from the first player in the second round. Another tactic is for the second player to open the second round with a CA spy which is a strategy against carryover that already exists and should remain in place. Besides, the first player can run summoning circle or a spy of their own to counter it. Both those options are available to every faction.

I know it sounds like a complicated change, but to me it seems the most logical solution. It will help to balance a broken element in the game that is awesome in so many other ways.

Any thoughts?

 

[partci]

Hm, a carryover token that spawns in R2 if you lost the CF AND R1 does not seem like so bad of an Idea, actually...

 

[Draconifors]

Mnorojo Thread merged and moved to Tech Support.

Plenty of coin flip solution suggestions in this thread, now including yours.

 

[Theodrik]

So, let's keep it simple. I haven't thought it out completely, but something that might work is just giving that player a bronze 4 strength token. When that player passes he is given the option to use the token (and only after the pass).

Interesting idea. So when the other player passes, you have the option to either play the token right away or use it on the beginning of the second round. I like it sir .

 

[Mnorojo]

Mnorojo Thread merged and moved to Tech Support.

Plenty of coin flip solution suggestions in this thread, now including yours.

No. It wouldnt be a token. That is too much of a variable. A token can be destroyed or buffed. It would instead be five points that would be added to the players score at the end of the round after both player passed and counted as part of the score for that round. If the second player passes right off this will prevent the first player from burning a card. But the second player can still play cards to force the first player to go through their deck. The five points will make it harder for them to win the first two rounds in a row. I think it will even the playing field some.

 

[Mnorojo]

This is the suggestion I have which is similar to a token.

I'm of the opinion that the most effective way to address the issue is to give the person who goes first extra points. These are points that will be added to the first player's score after both players have passed in the second round, but only if the first player lost the first round. So the first player does not get them in the event of a draw or first round win. The question then is how many points are enough? 5 seems like a good place to start. If it ends up being too much then it could be scaled back to 4 or 3. In any event, regardless of the 5 points, having won the first round, the second player will still have the advantage of going second in the third round if it the match goes that far.

This will eliminate the unfair CA created by playing first and losing the first round. The 1st player can now enter the third round without having had to burn a card in the 2nd round. Or if the second player decides to play the second round through, it will be harder to get the win. This will also make it easier for players to at least win one round and enjoy the rewards that come with it. Because honestly, there is nothing worse than getting steamrolled two rounds in a row, especially for beginners who have weak decks.

To reiterate, if the first player wins the first round, then there are no points, no changes. Only if the player loses.

Of course carryover from the second player can overcome the five point advantage and force another card from the first player in the second round. Another tactic is for the second player to open the second round with a CA spy which is a strategy against carryover that already exists and should remain in place. Besides, the first player can run summoning circle or a spy of their own to counter it. Both those options are available to every faction.

I know it sounds like a complicated change, but to me it seems the most logical solution. It will help to balance a broken element in the game that is awesome in so many other ways.

 

[DannyGuy]

The general consensus is that going first is bad, even if some niche deck can work with it. When the player who goes first received a small bonus, no one will really complain about it. So, let's keep it simple. I haven't thought it out completely, but something that might work is just giving that player a bronze 4 strength token. When that player passes he is given the option to use the token (and only after the pass). This means it cannot be used for card advantage, but it can prevent a dry pass in round 2 or give a small bonus in round 3.

The problem with this is, that the Bronze Token can still be Damaged by weather or Boosted by Kaedweni Siege Experts. Instead of this, I'd just give the player going first 4 extra points in the first round. These 4 points couldn't be removed, and you'd maybe get a hovering graphic indicating that those mysterious 4 extra points you have are because of you going first. These 4 points wouldn't be attached to a unit, and thus it couldn't be abused. I guess this still has weird synergies with King of Beggars, but that's the only one I could think of.

I don't like how in Hearthstone the Coin is considered a spell. It activates Combos for Rogues, and Spell Synergies fro Mage and Rogue. That's stupid.

 

[4RM3D]

Instead of this, I'd just give the player going first 4 extra points in the first round. These 4 points couldn't be removed.

The token cannot be interacted with by other abilities. Also, you have to give the player a choice in which round (s)he wants to use the token. Only being able to use is the first round is far too limiting.

 

[DannyGuy]

The token cannot be interacted with by other abilities. Also, you have to give the player a choice in which round (s)he wants to use the token. Only being able to use is the first round is far too limiting.

But the first round is the only round in which the coinflip is random. In other rounds the winner always goes first...

 

[4RM3D]

But the first round is the only round in which the coinflip is random. In other rounds the winner always goes first...

But if you went 2nd and won the round, you can dry pass in round 2, which gives you card advantage. The token is there to prevent that.

 

[overcold_ice]

But if you went 2nd and won the round, you can dry pass in round 2, which gives you card advantage. The token is there to prevent that.

Generally winning with -1 card in round 1 is the standard right? Then the dry-pass would make both players have even cards in round 3. If the player that went first but lost round 1 can just use a token, then it can make decks that need to dry-pass have no option to do it, and they'd just go with -1 card in round 3. It's similar like an elven wardancer in round 2, which not all faction should have just by going first.

I think it's best to just give the points in round 1, and as points, not unit of any kind. If there's a way that makes damaging cards work in first turn, then that'd be good. But points pretty much fix that anyway.

 

[MShauny]

but counter the advantage for getting to go second in the opening

A suggestion however.

The token is lost if the player which have to start the r1 first dry pass this turn; (Said otherwise, this token ability is triggered only if he plays a card from this hand).

 

[Iuliandrei]

Creating a Yes/No choice mechanic:
This overall suggestion needs to open with creating a mechanic where people can say if they want to go first or not.

This already exists, it was called "Scoia'tael faction ability"