XenokMe;n9203261 said:
I don't see the problem with highest unit strength on the field.
I don't see the problem with highest unit strength on the field.
So basically the boring feature comes in when people face the same couple of deck over and over am I right? So the complaints should really be against those players who netdecking for the sake of consistency? They are the one who cause such environment.
ResoundingBuahaha;n9205541 said:
Pretty much yes.
The problem is that while this is inevitable at high ranks, casual felt like a refuge for fun decks a once upon a time but i guess since open beta the mentally challenged found a new hobby.
Iuliandrei;n9207161 said:
Not really it is lack of variety that is the issue. Netdecking never was an issue and it never will be...
yep .... lack of variation sort of can cause this effect. since some people (me included) enjoy creative strategies that works, instead of the same shit being doing over and over again.
lomvicmarko;n9207241 said:
I'm not saying netdecking is the problem, I'm saying the players who keep netdecking every patch is the problem. What are people hating in this thread are actually a result of those player and their identical deck, this tendency of those players won't change if there are some deck that are more viable than others. I could probably say even the best balance team can't make every deck has identical consistency & difficulty to play and with the same power swing.
It's inherently in the design of competing game that some decks or strategy could appear better than others unless we are dealing with chess (Cue Radovid chess talk, "How does this mirror real life?"
As long as the players keep using the "best" deck for their ranking reward this problem is bound to repeat itself again and again.
ResoundingBuahaha;n9207441 said:
Seems to match my experience. I don't always see identical decks but there seems to be two types of deck I seem more than any other. If I'm strongly pressured to change a deck I like to respond to those or make the same deck to compete or climb ranks I feel less like I'm playing a game with choices and more like an optimization tester. Maybe this appeals to other players. But not to me.
ResoundingBuahaha;n9207441 said:
As I said that is not a problem. You blame people and not the game and that is wrong. You can't make discard unique they are all going to look identical and use same strategy. Same goes for mulligan, movement and decks like it there is no room to innovate and you are practically forces to use certain cards because that is how devs wanted it.
lomvicmarko;n9207591 said:
We are focusing on different aspect I guess so there is no need to argue. Let's take a example of current meta say swarm Dagon. What you mentioned basically means you want variety in those strategy so that not every deck is identical 3 foglet & Triss butt and in this way it's less boring. However what I meant is once certain deck appears to be more viable than others people would flood ladder with swarm deck regardless of their individual small adjustment (Just like the tendency what we have seen in last patch and this patch, From SK bear to SK axemen to Consume MO to Swarm MO) so the game would of course become repetitive.
And as far as I concern it's the players who directly lead to such result and since the environment consists up with players so it's more reasonable to discuss players. After all it's only meaningful to blame something alive so it's either dev team or player we can possibly blame.
Last edited:
You can't blame players for wanting to win and when people find something that works they will shape meta with it. There is nothing to talk about here players play it like it was meant to be played. There is hell of a lot more to talk about devs changes and how they affected the game. This can be discussed in great detail while blaming players for wanting to be on top and looking to get advantage where they can is no lame at best.
The sheer ammount of netdecking is a symptom of CDPRs continual inability to remotely balance the game. The gaps between T1 and T2 decks gets bigger and bigger each patch which leads to the variety (which is already small) shrinking into 2-3 decks that make up the VAST bulk of the gameplay.
The players arent the problem, CDPRs balance team is.
The players arent the problem, CDPRs balance team is.
Last edited:
lomvicmarko;n9208091 said:
And yet none of those would change the player tendency, actually I'm not even blaming players, I merely describe what they do.
Zjiin;n9208121 said:
I believe you can do it well
Any thoughts improving the game?ResoundingBuahaha;n9208681 said:
That is what I'm trying to say nothing is going to change player tendency that is why you need to change environment they play in. Every competitive game is like that.
I'm still enjoying getting destroyed almost every match by players who end up with cards in the region of around 40+ - As annoying as it is, the games is just so damn addictive.
I am however getting bored of earning petty scraps, I saved up days of countless defeats to finally buy my first gold card -800 scraps, next keg I open I get the same gold card and mill it for 200 so end up wasting 600 scraps. Also unlocking the same useless card is getting to be about as enjoyable as a kick in the nut sack, this games about as balanced as a pissed up blind man on a unicycle.
I am however getting bored of earning petty scraps, I saved up days of countless defeats to finally buy my first gold card -800 scraps, next keg I open I get the same gold card and mill it for 200 so end up wasting 600 scraps. Also unlocking the same useless card is getting to be about as enjoyable as a kick in the nut sack, this games about as balanced as a pissed up blind man on a unicycle.
ResoundingBuahaha;n9207841 said:
The players flock to certain decks because, barring certain MU's, they're superior to the alternatives. Ergo, seeing deck A to C spammed isn't the fault of the players. If those decks weren't an I win in certain MU's, or at an advantage in most of them because carry-over/unit spam is hard, you wouldn't see deck A to C getting spammed. Does that answer your question?
Restlessdingo32;n9209711 said:
I wish not to continue the blaming issue, I was describing what they do instead of accusing. And I don't know if that's true if we have not so good A to C so that they won't get spammed. According to what we've agreed people tend to use the best deck available in the meta, it would take a perfect balance where every strategy can have equal win rate against any other strategy so that we can achieve the variety, pretty ideal to achieve I guess.
What I perceive as a good balance is the different strategy keeps escalating to counter each other and there should be decent or viable counter available for every faction so that everyone can have a fair game, instead of squeeze in the meta faction.
ResoundingBuahaha;n9208681 said:And yet none of those would change the player tendency, actually I'm not even blaming players, I merely describe what they do.
I believe you can do it well
Change Harpies so they arent unconditional carry-over, drop the spawned harpies to 2 or such and make the eggs trigger under a circumstance.. - Card is a blatant problem where even after 2 nerfs the card is STILL in nearly every single monsters list and that is because of the completely unconditional carry-over ability - a effect that has lead to monsters being unbalanced more than their fair share of times.
Change foglets to work closer to how Roach and Imperial Golems do - So that they can only appear once rather than every single time a fog is played - Brings them more in line with the other similar effect cards. Give them a small strength buff to 3, potentially 4 to compensate for only appearing once. Still means Dagon is a 17 point card and that Bronze fog is 11. While im not a fan of how Golems work either given their effeciency as tempo and deck thinning (especially compared to Saskia.) , theres also no real way to change foglets beyond this without either 100% killing the card or completely reworking weather again. Foglets are one of the key reasons why Dagon still remains the most common Monsters leader, a title he's held for virtually all the games lifespan for several reasons, But now with weather being brought relatively in-line, He should of experienced a bit of drop-off. He hasnt. Why? Foglets.
Monsters in general tends to have over-budget cards with too high stats for their effects. Earth Ele is a strictly better Alba Spearman (not a great card itself, but still.) because of its slightly smaller body in return for 4 unconditional carry-over next round. If it keeps the unconditional carry over, the base body shouldnt be a 6 + shield. It has the same body as a Wild Hunt Rider without needing a condition to provide carry over. Drop the body down to a 4 and the card is still 8 power over 2 rounds. Even 5 is more viable, as it'd stay a 9 power bronze over 2.
Ekkimara is also a better Combat Egineer in all but the most fringe cases while having the benefit of triggering Behemoths and buffing Nekkers. (Combat Egineer itself is also in need of love, 2 base is way to low. 4 was too high. 3 should be fine - Akin to Ekkimara.)
It's at this point its worth noting that Monsters arent "neccesarily" over-strengthed, but potentially the others have been far over-nerfed and underbudgeted and ignored.
Its one of the relatively quiet ones, But Auckes needs a rework as well. Being a silver Radovid (minus the damage) is just too strong, Shouldnt be able to hit 2 targets. Means hes rarely a dead card and offers way to much versatility to other locks. While he's a godsend against Dwarf decks admitedly, being able to shut down 2 effects with 1 card is too strong, especially when coupled with a not-terrible body (not a good one by any means, but not outright awful) Either needs to go lower base strength or become a single-target card - potentially akin to Serrit in being able to lock a revealed non-gold card in hand in return for low base strength?.
Flesh out the currently half-arsed unfinished archetypes like Mulligan and Movement. (ST especially as useless cards like Iorveth, which i know has a movement effect on it already but given that effect is almost old-Wild Boar of the Sea level useless he needs changing). Mulligan itself also needs a lot of work, especially as the deck is handicapped from the very start by how the blacklisting mulligan system works and critically lacks any real silver and gold support. Needs something like a Nithral to help make Neophytes actually worth considering as currently their just worse War Longships and Mangonels with a riskier condition to proc.
NR...Well theres a whole lot that needs doing (surprise surprise) to make this faction anything more than either a tempo-spam deck or a hardcore control Baron deck. So many of the factions cards are complete trash and useless (Look at most of their golds.) Natalis is too weak for a finisher in a already weak Machine deck. Machines in general need love, as their effects are for the most part highly conditional and generally ineffective. Cards like Ballista are good if they line up properly, But thats a BIG if. A once in 100 games if - and it never see's play. Potentially makes it effect deal 2 damage twice, But cant hit the same enemy in a row (Homage to the Foltest scene in the Witcher 2 when the La Valletes fire a Ballista at Foltest and the NG envoy where Foltest states a Ballista cant hit the same spot twice.)
Priscillia is a gold commanders horn that takes 4 turns to actually achieve the same value and takes a gold slot. The effect only worked on dandelion before because he was a silver and could be resurrected twice in a game via Shani and Nenneke , Simply doesnt work on a gold card. Effect either needs reworking or the body needs to be bigger, Dandelion atleast see's someplay as he's got a half-decent gold body to back his effect up. Prisc has a bad effect thats easier gained from other cards with a bad body that takes a gold slot.
Morkvarg nerf was complete overkill. I get why they did it as the Crach + Mork play was completely obscene, but now the card is virtually non-existant. Possibly make it work in a similar way to KoB, in that it starts with a low(ish) base strength but gains base upon entering the board up to its normal strength + its old res effect. Avoids the issue with crach Alzurs while not leaving the card virtually useless and as a slightly better version of Olgierd (which is itself a bad card for the same reason of its effect being crap.) Harald is also just....yeah. That card needs a overhaul badly. Highly conditional effect + laughably low body = never seen competitively. Needs at the VERY least a higher body like Morvran / Frannie to not be a complete joke. Other than this, SK is actually pretty well balanced IMO now that Frost has been dealt with - Has 3 relatively viable archetypes running in Warcry, Queensguard and pure-Discard.
Thats already a wall of text im not being paid for, there you go.
Last edited:
Zjiin;n9210831 said:
I actually have been testing Pricilla today, have to say her "random" target buff is kinda problematic and more often than not her boost make a row actually more vulnerable to igni since she can accidentally create 2 same power unit. In other condition she keeps boosting Dethmond, Treb or ballista that I need to decoy or siege platform.....I thought she could be good but turns out being inconsistent.
It feels to me like there are too many free points gained without interaction by the user, too many carry-over options (ties to the first point) and too much on demand tempo. It's starting to feel like this is a design goal.