Is This The META of Exaggeration?

[ibilibertas]

I understand it is not easy to read through everything but i don't use the term "Exaggeration" in a negative way. Secondly, i already mentioned that the purpose of this post is not to judge cards or factions or Leaders. Overall mechanics etc. yes, but specific cards no, i mention some cards as an example, not as something i consider OP (or not).

It is rather pointless to repeat myself but, based on what i see on YouTube/Forums etc. i see similar trends on topics. Usually we feel we were outplayed by the game and not by the opponent, because we all want to protect our egos ,more or less. The sole purpose is to refrain from posting things like, "Don't play this or that, "This card is OP" and so on and take a minute, read, ask questions and gain more knowledge about the game.

Remember, even if you play a card that is considered OP, a Faction or an archetype, if you are netdecking and so on, NO, don't stop doing it if you feel that's what you want. My understanding of an OBT is to gather as much data and stats regarding trends and what is played and what is not. Things will be reworked and re-think and adjustments will happen.

How will Gold weather be affected with 1 dmg. less? How X card will change by losing 3 str.? We should ask questions to find solutions.

The only thing i came into a solid conclusion is the playable Leaders. It makes the game and specific archetypes predictable. Predictable is boring in other words and we want to avoid that. Also the Leaders provide huge str. swings on turn one, which i find disheartening because not all archetypes can respond in tempo. I don't like playable Leaders for these reasons and i don't know what else i might be missing.

I was hoping in a different discussion, not the same things i see over and over again but i guess ultimately data will be analyzed based on what people play and what not.

 

[Stormbuster]

I was hoping in a different discussion, not the same things i see over and over again but i guess ultimately data will be analyzed based on what people play and what not.

Mate, unfortunately today CG business is oriented to players who don't like to think too much, having consumer behavior" "I paid for fun, I want fast fun". Without these meta exaggerated decks, game will be populated only by passionate players, willing to use various strategies involving ALL THE CARDS in the collection...not only few of them. And this will result in low income stream for developers.

Personally barely started but became annoyed really fast by large number of players using same NG decks. And my opinion is that, at least in ranked, the game already turned to a hidden pay to win, by manipulating the RNG. I played only few ranked but stopped....barely got a total of 3-4 legendary cards in that many games, while my opponents were pouring them one after another, trying to replace card and getting them back two times in a row, trio's like play x and summon y and z are hiding somewhere in the deck, game by game, round by round...etc...

Anyone who will asses his/her own game in terms of probabilities will understand what I am saying. Developers are only interested in milking as many people and as long as possible, by offering them " easy fun". The intelligent games in both form and content are not raising enough cash. So, as lot of other similar dev. teams out there, they are presenting us with an seemingly intelligent game, reduced in fact to clicking. Clinking giving more cards, or scrap to build more cards...cards that will never ever be used.

They were somewhat more intelligent than, say Blizzard. Even the loser has some fun, while is quite easy for anyone to get a round. So everyone can make daily quests, get pack, be happy whenever will bust open one containing silver or gold cards.

At the end, is only my opinion, based on a low number of ranked games. This issue can be however clarified by players up there in the ladder. Are you upthere? Are you a F2P or a P2W?

Game is having lot of potential. However, it is already and will be ruined... on one side by the developers legit interest in cashing as much as possible and by the players easy-gaming approach.