GrimJ0ker | 2015-01-28 17:17:40 |
Today i'm very very very annoyed , more than usual, by the class time. I've had enough of this injustice of this shit of class, how is it possible there were not changes to this class, now it's clear to all and for a long time that this class is overpowered yet, it has too many advantages, chrono4 continues to reign despite the latest downgrade (5d to 4), chrono2 is frankly embarrassing, chrono3 is pretty ridiculous against the golem class. I don't want to talk about winrate of strongest players, we already know that but also players lvl.10-->20 win quite easly with this class , how is it possible that majority of my lost and i bet of many other players is against chronomancers? I hope something will change because is very frustrating .I hope other players will agree about this. HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-28 17:22:15 |
I assume the time class would continue to get nerfed for clearly having a superior win rate, it's just that the game isn't being updated. It's a shame but it sounds like Estarh is totally involved with the new Astral game and he is only one person (if I understand correctly he is the one mainly responsible for balance updates.)
GrimJ0ker | 2015-01-28 17:33:05 |
Last update 26/10/2012 .....
Krugopryad | 2015-01-28 17:49:22 |
In another topic some of the known players (HFG too) trolled me about my suggestion to remove this class from the game. I'm glad someone else on high level understood this "shit of class". HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-28 17:53:55 |
In another topic some of the known players (HFG too) trolled me about my suggestion to remove this class from the game. I'm glad someone else on high level understood this "shit of class".
I didn't "troll" you, I made a joke that was intended to point out that suggesting total removal of the class is excessive. Grim isn't asking for it to be deleted, just nerfed, and if you had suggested nerfing it instead of deleting it I would have agreed with you too. Jeronimo | 2015-01-28 19:14:18 |
I'm with you guys. 2 small tips to make this class less powerful (taken from the other topic).
1) Time Stop doesn't allow to play Time cards next turn. 2) Swap top cards -> time dragon cost 7, chrono engine cost 8.
----- Offtopic: In the other hand, I'd like a boost to Sorcery class. 1) Steal essence deals 6 damage (+1 dmg and works always even if doesn't kill the creature). 2) Mana burn cuts "the half" the amount of opponent highest mana (instead of -3). Modified by Jeronimo on 2015-01-28 19:19:18 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-28 19:21:31 |
I like the mana burn suggestion, that card has always been a problem -- when it started it was too good and now it sucks. Making it a more drastic mana reduction is probably the best way to get it useful again without making it the most ridiculous dragon card in the game again.
I feel like steal essence would be too good if it always increased your mana though... compare that to overtime, for example. CrashAndBurn | 2015-01-28 19:35:20 |
I'm with you guys.2 small tips to make this class less powerful (taken from the other topic).
1) Time Stop doesn't allow to play Time cards next turn. 2) Swap top cards -> time dragon cost 7, chrono engine cost 8.
----- Offtopic: In the other hand, I'd like a boost to Sorcery class. 1) Steal essence deals 6 damage (+1 dmg and works always even if doesn't kill the creature). 2) Mana burn cuts "the half" the amount of opponent highest mana (instead of -3). I always thought, given the name of "STEAL ESSENCE" it should give the player life. When you STEAL something you have it. It shouldn't just disappear. It's so circumstantial as to nearly be useless most of the time. Steal Essence -> Deal 6 damage (as you indicated), Heals 6 If it kills the critter, gain 4 mana. If it does not kill the critter, gain 1 mana. Which puts it in line with Call to Thunder, as specialty mana is worth a bout 1.33 - 1.50.
Jeronimo | 2015-01-28 19:36:07 |
I like the mana burn suggestion, that card has always been a problem -- when it started it was too good and now it sucks. Making it a more drastic mana reduction is probably the best way to get it useful again without making it the most ridiculous dragon card in the game again.
I feel like steal essence would be too good if it always increased your mana though... compare that to overtime, for example. Steal essence would be alright for the class design which is the most important factor. Currently is not even close to the global impact that Sacrifice has in the class. Sorcery 4 defines matches.
Overtime is fine for the class design... you can get a fast Cannon 6 with it (which means an earlier additional 8 damage impact on his highest HP creature).
@CrashBurn: Steal Essence -> Deal 6 damage (as you indicated), Heals 6 If it kills the critter, gain 4 mana. If it does not kill the critter, gain 1 mana.
Your idea is nice too.. a sort of "anti-call to thunder", which gives life to the casting player. The point is the same: Steal essence is way behind it's paired card, Sacrifice.
Modified by Jeronimo on 2015-01-28 19:41:26 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-28 19:41:13 |
... Steal essence would be alright for the class design which is the most important factor.
But it would essentially just be overtime with damage added. If the card's function is going to be made the same as overtime, why give it free damage on top of that? It would be extremely powerful to always get out early sonic boom and disintegrate, too.
I can see bumping up the damage so there are more cases where you can use it, because I agree that it is weak compared to sacrifice. But I think this would be overpowered. CrashAndBurn | 2015-01-28 19:43:24 |
Today i'm very very very annoyed , more than usual, by the class time. I've had enough of this injustice of this shit of class, how is it possible there were not changes to this class, now it's clear to all and for a long time that this class is overpowered yet, it has too many advantages, chrono4 continues to reign despite the latest downgrade (5d to 4), chrono2 is frankly embarrassing, chrono3 is pretty ridiculous against the golem class. I don't want to talk about winrate of strongest players, we already know that but also players lvl.10-->20 win quite easly with this class , how is it possible that majority of my lost and i bet of many other players is against chronomancers? I hope something will change because is very frustrating .I hope other players will agree about this. I have felt that the nature of the game encourages Mana Hoarding. The game balance goes out the window in many respects when this happens. Like being able to cast Time Stop over and over again ad nauseum. I have thought, that spells could have an effective cool-down. Temporarily increasing their cost, which goes down by 1 (or a fraction of cost) every turn. So for example Time Stop (T4), after being cast, it's cost would go to 6,7,or 8 (50% - 100%) Every turn thereafter it's cost would go down by 1 or 2, until it is back to 4. This would prevent many exploits that are in effect caused by mana hoarding. And in and of itself, would perhaps address Time's bogus nature. ----- The other idea changes the game significantly, and likely will be shouted down ;) Spells require "preparation". Like having a mana battery. To cast a spell, you have to fill the "Spell Mana Battery". You can place up to half of your mana (of one type) into it's Mana Battery. The mana in the battery is locked (cannot be removed back to your normal pool) by half the number of turns (of the mana) that you just placed into it. Example: Turn 1: You have 6 Fire Mana. You place 3 into your Fire "Spell Mana Battery". Turn 2: You decide that was a bad idea, but you can't withdraw it until turn 3 (2 turns: half of 3). Hoarding Example: You have a shitload of Fire Mana and just cast Armageddon. You can't cast it again the next turn - your Spell mana battery is empty. Alternative Spell Damage using Mana Batteries: Armageddon would not deal 8 + Total Fire Mana, instead Armageddon would deal 8 + amount in your Fire Mana Battery. Mana Batteries could be shown to the other player or not. TLDR; If Spells can't be cast ad-nauseum due to Hoarding Mana, the bogus nature of Time wouldn't be so blatant. Modified by CrashAndBurn on 2015-01-28 20:01:44 Cooler | 2015-01-28 20:14:26 |
I assume the time class would continue to get nerfed for clearly having a superior win rate, it's just that the game isn't being updated. It's a shame but it sounds like Estarh is totally involved with the new Astral game and he is only one person (if I understand correctly he is the one mainly responsible for balance updates.) Estarh said he's going to tweak the game balance soon. However, we're quite limited in changes: only those that don't require new IOS binary will be made.
Modified by Cooler on 2015-01-28 20:20:03 Jeronimo | 2015-01-28 20:29:30 |
... Estarh said he's going to tweak the game balance soon. However, we're quite limited in changes: only those that don't require new IOS binary will be made.
It's a pity but alright. Anyway I like the common updates because often bring unexpected surprises such as giving Fire Elemental +1 hp, Water Elemental -1 hp and such... Which creature is going to obtain the Easter Egg next update? HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-28 20:34:44 |
... Estarh said he's going to tweak the game balance soon. However, we're quite limited in changes: only those that don't require new IOS binary will be made.
Glad to hear it! Wavelength | 2015-01-28 21:47:32 |
I'd make the following changes to Time and I think it would be perfectly balanced:Time 3: 7 damage cap, but can be used with any creature (even those above 7 damage) Time 4: 5 damage, but prevents use of Time cards next turn Time 5: -1 HP Time 7: -1 HP========================= Other things: Last update 26/10/2012 ..... This is incorrect. A balance change was made in 2014, I believe - that's how Bargul and Troll reached 26 HP, for one. Crash & Burn: your idea is very interesting but would be far too large of a change to the core strategy of Spectro at this point. "Scaling" cards in and of themselves aren't a problem - the only problems are the opponent's ability to prevent it (usually happens if they draw Chain Lightning as their only basic house spell). Time Stop IS problematic but the problem there is spammability, not scaling - and while your solution would probably fix it, it would be the equivalent of using an A-Bomb to get rid of an anthill. =) I don't think Steal Essence is underpowered by itself. But Mana Burn needs some love. I would recommend bringing back the direct damage, but having it deal the damage after the mana reduction rather than before. Or, more conservatively, just increasing the opponent's Mana Loss to 4 instead of 3. GrimJ0ker | 2015-01-28 23:30:53 |
Sincerly i don't understand how is it possible a card like time2 which can do also 20 damages, 5 of attack and 17 of hp.
Xanatos | 2015-01-28 23:57:38 |
Sincerly i don't understand how is it possible a card like time2 which can do also 20 damages, 5 of attack and 17 of hp. It'd make much more sense, if it limited the Attack Str of the attackers to the current Str of the Timeblazer (including any possible Minotaurs, or Orc Chieftains that might apply). Or even the lesser of the Timeblazer's current Str/actual attackers Str.
Modified by Xanatos on 2015-01-28 23:58:36 Xanatos | 2015-01-29 00:20:34 |
... But it would essentially just be overtime with damage added. If the card's function is going to be made the same as overtime, why give it free damage on top of that? It would be extremely powerful to always get out early sonic boom and disintegrate, too.
I can see bumping up the damage so there are more cases where you can use it, because I agree that it is weak compared to sacrifice. But I think this would be overpowered.
Call to Thunder (A3) does 12 damage. Overtime - has no circumstantial restrictions, no sacrifice required to use it, no target required and can always be cast unless Your playing against Control. I'm not sure how Overtime can effectively be compared to Steal Essence which needs 3 mana to cast, a target, and the target has to die to make it much worth using at all - in most cases.
HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-29 01:07:33 |
I'm not sure how Overtime can effectively be compared to Steal Essence which needs 3 mana to cast, a target, and the target has to die to make it much worth using at all - in most cases.
That's my point. Jeronimo is suggesting buffing the card by making it so it gives the extra mana even if it does not destroy the targeted creature. This would mean it could almost always be used exactly like overtime but with damage as well, except in the rare case there are no creatures on the board or you have less than 3 sorcery mana already.
Last update 26/10/2012 .....
my version of mana burn would deal 3 damage to the player (a small buff) or maybe just make it drain 4 mana instead of 3
Modified by filip on 2015-01-29 09:02:58
Estarh said he's going to tweak the game balance soon. However, we're quite limited in changes: only those that don't require new IOS binary will be made.
wow great news!
Modified by filip on 2015-01-29 09:55:14
I agree. And more cards need rebalanced.Just like Cult 6,Blood 6 etc. And add more combos to the ban list.Just like Ice Golem and Divine Justice.
Modified by SoAid on 2015-01-29 13:00:56 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-29 14:28:07 |
And add more combos to the ban list.Just like Ice Golem and Divine Justice.
Disagree. I'm opposed to ban combos unless absolutely necessary. There is no real problem with ice golem and divine justice, we were just discussing this in another thread and the consensus seemed to be this is not always a good strategy. GrimJ0ker | 2015-01-29 16:39:57 |
I agree about cult6, a little nerf to hp could be good. It's quite stronger than chaos6. Also vampire class need a little nerf. Instead what are in your opinion the classes must be buffed? In my opinion sorcerer,mech,chaos and golemmaster are under the avarage of the classes.
Wavelength | 2015-01-29 20:33:02 |
Instead what are in your opinion the classes must be buffed? In my opinion sorcerer,mech,chaos and golemmaster are under the avarage of the classes. I'd say Sorcerer, Goblin Master, Cultist and Chaosmaster probably need a few buffs. Definitely not Golem Master, though, which needs a rework but is definitely not too weak. * Sorcerer's biggest need is a major buff to Mana Burn. I guess Steal Essence could use a slight buff, but it's a fairly useful card. * Goblin Master needs a lot of internal balancing. Each pair has a clearly stronger card (1 > 0, 3 > 2, 5 > 4, 7 > 6). Goblin Hero definitely needs a nerf, and maybe Goblin Looter. These two cards might be singlehandedly keeping this weak class' winrate afloat. The four "weaker" cards in their pairs all need buffs, especially Goblin Raider, which can be good but is far too situational for a class' high card. * Cultist could probably use some slight buffs to a few of its cards, like 3, 5, 7, and 8 (and, in the same breath, a nerf to 6). * Chaosmaster's cards all feel like they should be in a good spot right now to me, but in my experience it never tends to be quite enough. My guess would be 1HP buffs to its 5, 6, and 8 (and maybe an extra attack point for Insanian Catapult, along with -1 HP), but I'm not so confident I know what I'm talking about with this one.
GrimJ0ker | 2015-01-29 21:05:40 |
Nice opinions wave, i only disagree about cultist class, i think is pretty good, i disagree especially about zealot's buff. But the important thing is common opinions will be heard.
how about meditation + drain souls?
would that mess up the necromancer's information game too much?
hmm it would also affect their winrate for sure
perhaps not a good idea to begin with
Modified by filip on 2015-01-30 00:50:01 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-30 01:01:47 |
As annoying as the death information game is, I'd rather not see card bans to solve it.
Wavelength | 2015-01-30 01:28:20 |
You sure wouldn't find me complaining about a Phoenix + Drain Souls ban.
GrimJ0ker | 2015-01-30 02:07:31 |
There is already the restriction meditation + cursed fog...it would be really bad for necromancer class, a meditation would ruin the bluff game showing two special cards.
meditation + phoenix + drain souls
it will be interesting to see which classes will be the least played in the tournament of champions tomorrow TheWillofSauron | 2015-01-30 10:43:05 |
Well Grim, I believe u got some politic power LOL. Time class to be nerfed or completely changed has been asked for YEARS in dozen of threads, it seems we're going to have at least some changes now :) May also you kindly ask to change the "infamous dragon" as well? :D :D :D Speaking of annoyance, I'm also BORED ... A LOT by Golem and Rabbit together. We need ONLY 1 of the 2 classes please. It's a tactical nonsense to me. Why don't we get a new spell only class as sorcery then also? Generally the game is always great, but it could be brought to a better level with some other changes, even if we just got it won't be ever true :( Just my 2 cents, mm75
HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-30 14:23:03 |
Time class to be nerfed or completely changed has been asked for YEARS in dozen of threads, it seems we're going to have at least some changes now :)
Don't get too excited yet. Cooler said there would be a balance update, but he didn't say what would change. TheWillofSauron | 2015-01-30 15:00:19 |
... Don't get too excited yet. Cooler said there would be a balance update, but he didn't say what would change.
Lol ... no I'm not definitely don't worry :) :) :) mm75
Wavelength | 2015-01-30 19:03:38 |
Time class to be nerfed or completely changed has been asked for YEARS in dozen of threads, it seems we're going to have at least some changes now :) The thing is, though, most (admittedly not all) top players agree that a major rework to Time is unnecessary; just some slight nerfs. Speaking of annoyance, I'm also BORED ... A LOT by Golem and Rabbit together. We need ONLY 1 of the 2 classes please. It's a tactical nonsense to me. Why don't we get a new spell only class as sorcery then also? It's an update, my friend, not an expansion. GrimJ0ker | 2015-01-30 20:29:42 |
Is it normal in your opinion with time7 in play, you can use stone rain killing the same time7 and then you are still available to do the second move....lol that shit...
For example, the opponent has 23hp my board is full and i have time7, i do geddon(19damages) and all board is clear, soon after i can play my fire4 to finish him. Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2015-01-30 20:36:46 tosher | 2015-01-30 21:50:50 |
bad example) usually 19dmg geddon = 11 fire mana then no mana for fire 4
HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-30 22:25:44 |
Is it normal in your opinion with time7 in play, you can use stone rain killing the same time7 and then you are still available to do the second move....lol that shit...For example, the opponent has 23hp my board is full and i have time7, i do geddon(19damages) and all board is clear, soon after i can play my fire4 to finish him. It makes sense to me, the chrono engine adds the extra turn at the start of the round, so even if it is killed the extra turn is sort of already queued up, so to speak.
I do think time 7 is very powerful and I could see an HP nerf being warranted, but I don't think that card is really bad. I see time stop and hasten as the real issue with the class GrimJ0ker | 2015-01-31 00:39:16 |
my board is time7 time5 time5 time5 time5 time5
Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2015-01-31 00:41:53 Jeronimo | 2015-01-31 01:06:07 |
For example, the opponent has 23hp my board is full and i have time7, i do geddon(19damages) and all board is clear, soon after i can play my fire4 to finish him.
bad example) usually 19dmg geddon = 11 fire mana then no mana for fire 4 I'm worried about your tomorrow Giuseppe. Numbers can be a tricky enemy. Please be careful.
Modified by Jeronimo on 2015-01-31 01:11:08 Wavelength | 2015-01-31 09:00:38 |
Is it normal in your opinion with time7 in play, you can use stone rain killing the same time7 and then you are still available to do the second move....lol that shit...For example, the opponent has 23hp my board is full and i have time7, i do geddon(19damages) and all board is clear, soon after i can play my fire4 to finish him. This would actually be a great place, I think, to shave off a bit of Chrono Engine's excess power - by making it so that the extra turn isn't "granted" at the beginning of the turn but is instead "enabled" by Chrono Engine assuming it is alive at the end of the previous phase. I think moves like the one you described always feel more cheesy than they do clever, at least to me. In general though, I feel like people focus on Chrono Engine for its very visible impact and they miss Time's more subtly dangerous cards, like Timeweaver (which I'd prefer to Chrono Engine most of the time) and even Time Dragon (which I'd prefer to Ancient Giant most of the time).
MikeBnDe | 2015-01-31 11:36:59 |
I am just level 2x, so maybe i am overlooking something, but i agree 100% with grim. Sometimes when you play time, you get card setups that are ridculous. If i can crush a level 32 player, who is far better than me, WITHOUT even thinking ONCE while speaking with a friend, something isn't right. The player surrendered after a few moves when i played t3 on a F10 with attack 9, while opponent had 4 creatures out. 5*9=45 damage for 3 mana? LOL
Modified by MikeBnDe on 2015-01-31 11:38:24 Xanatos | 2015-01-31 19:45:16 |
You sure wouldn't find me complaining about a Phoenix + Drain Souls ban. I complain a little (to myself anyways) when it is Death v Death, and one death player has Drain Souls (me), and the other gets Tornado AND Phoenix.
Xanatos | 2015-01-31 20:00:54 |
As annoying as the death information game is, I'd rather not see card bans to solve it. Like the Orc Chieftain + Forest Sprite ban... I would think that could be better solved with a mechanic adjustment instead of an outright card-combo ban. Orc Chieftain --> +2 STR to neighbours; Cannot increase a unit's STR to more than double. Thus it would limit the bonus to "+1" to critters that only have a STR 1. Would just need to consider if the max bonus is based on their Default or Current Str. Would 2 Orc Chieftains make the Forest Sprite Str 4 (1+1+2) or Str 3 (1+1+1) ?
Modified by Xanatos on 2015-01-31 20:03:32 HeadphonesGirl | 2015-01-31 20:24:32 |
... Like the Orc Chieftain + Forest Sprite ban... I would think that could be better solved with a mechanic adjustment instead of an outright card-combo ban. Orc Chieftain --> +2 STR to neighbours; Cannot increase a unit's STR to more than double. Thus it would limit the bonus to "+1" to critters that only have a STR 1.
I like this idea. The only other cases it would affect would be vamp 3 and elementals that happen to have 1 attack which basically makes no difference. That'd be a more elegant solution than banning the combo.
Orc Chieftain --> +2 STR to neighbours; Cannot increase a unit's STR to more than double. Thus it would limit the bonus to "+1" to critters that only have a STR 1.
Would just need to consider if the max bonus is based on their Default or Current Str. Would 2 Orc Chieftains make the Forest Sprite Str 4 (1+1+2) or Str 3 (1+1+1) ?
i like this! prefer 1+1+2
but wait: perhaps the combo would still be (unhealthily) strong?
Modified by filip on 2015-01-31 23:16:55 Wavelength | 2015-02-01 08:15:19 |
I think it's a fine suggestion, although I personally like having several banned combos out there since it makes the information game richer.
Xanatos | 2015-02-02 23:12:37 |
I'm with you guys.2 small tips to make this class less powerful (taken from the other topic).
1) Time Stop doesn't allow to play Time cards next turn. 2) Swap top cards -> time dragon cost 7, chrono engine cost 8.
----- Offtopic: In the other hand, I'd like a boost to Sorcery class. 1) Steal essence deals 6 damage (+1 dmg and works always even if doesn't kill the creature). 2) Mana burn cuts "the half" the amount of opponent highest mana (instead of -3). I think the reduction of 3 for Mana Burn is likely balanced on a 12 pt scale. Perhaps a 25% (min. of 3) or 33% (min. of 4) reduction. @33% reduction:: 12 --> 8, 15-->10, 21-->14 It could additionally damage the opponent by the amount of mana reduction. I've also thought about what I suggested above with Steal Esssence, and possibly this instead: 5 Damage, +4 mana if the creature dies, +1 mana if it does not. Casting player gains (3+dmg caused))/2 life :: 2 - 4 life --- regardless if the creature dies. DM..Heal, --> 4,4,3,3,2 instead of 5,4,3,2,1 5........4 4........4 3........3 2........3 1........2
Wavelength | 2015-02-03 02:42:18 |
Interesting design ideas, Xanatos, but far too complicated. Clarity is important. The player shouldn't have to think through complex ideas and calculations just to figure out the base effect for a card.
My ideas:
Mana Burn: Increase opponent mana loss to 4, or restore to its original form (where it also deals direct damage to the opponent) but do all damage calculations after the mana reduction instead of before.
Steal Essence: Increase damage to 6 and call it a day.
TheWillofSauron | 2015-02-09 16:26:33 |
... It's an update, my friend, not an expansion.
Yeah I know it, but I'd go to remove completely Golem (or rabbit, let's do a referendum about that). No really need to have both, it's tactically unfair for all other classes :P mm75
Sinist | 2015-02-09 18:52:44 |
... Yeah I know it, but I'd go to remove completely Golem (or rabbit, let's do a referendum about that). No really need to have both, it's tactically unfair for all other classes :P mm75
rabbit is ok, imho. Golem has way much more awful design CyberneticPony | 2015-02-09 21:01:52 |
I think Mad Hermit is fine because the operational value of its mana is much lower; the Rabbit offset is really interesting. Golem on the other hand plays like a coinflip.
Wavelength | 2015-02-10 17:52:46 |
Mad Hermit is fine.
CyberneticPony | 2015-02-11 19:01:02 |
You know, I'm just leaving this game for good. This game has AWFUL inter-class balance, and this thread is a good indicator.
Plynx's winrates are equally good indicators; if he played the underpowered factions he'd also lose a large amount of winrate, but he doesn't.
I doubt mathematics were used at ALL in actually establishing a good balance state.
And the fact Golem Master even exists indicates terrible design philosophies.
Modified by CyberneticPony on 2015-02-11 19:01:17 Cooler | 2015-02-11 20:02:56 |
Plynx's winrates are equally good indicators; if he played the underpowered factions he'd also lose a large amount of winrate, but he doesn't.
The game wasn't designed for Plynx, actually :)
HeadphonesGirl | 2015-02-11 21:11:39 |
You know, I'm just leaving this game for good. This game has AWFUL inter-class balance, and this thread is a good indicator.
Plynx's winrates are equally good indicators; if he played the underpowered factions he'd also lose a large amount of winrate, but he doesn't.
I doubt mathematics were used at ALL in actually establishing a good balance state.
And the fact Golem Master even exists indicates terrible design philosophies. Don't lay on the charm TOO thick, now.
This game has AWFUL inter-class balance, and this thread is a good indicator.
ignorance is bliss
Modified by filip on 2015-02-12 08:36:03 vvjacobo | 2015-02-12 14:37:27 |
In my humble opinion:
Time stop needs a nerf.
Dragon could do perfectly with a nerf to prevent some autowins, he doesnt really needs atack 9 or > 40 hp to be a great card. Let me have another chance to kill it at least with stone rain + a12 before he kills me in 2 turns...
Vampire could do with a small nerf specially the 2 inmortal summons, being invulnerable 1-2 turn could be enough. Modified by vvjacobo on 2015-02-12 14:38:06 Theodorus | 2015-02-12 21:02:19 |
He costs like hell, and have normal stat for 12 mana basic house.And is quite easy understand when you are gonna dragon+e6/a6. Same Time stop, but is hard do prevent it so->time2:change the effect, time 3:7 but usable on everyone(by wavelenght) time 4:6 damage but can t be double casted.
p.s: i HATE golem master, stall necro7, and early spirit/holy 4, cult8 drawback too poor(3->5) and who play only 1-2 class.
Wavelength | 2015-02-18 15:00:50 |
You know, I'm just leaving this game for good. This game has AWFUL inter-class balance, and this thread is a good indicator.
byebye we'll miss you, enjoy hearthstone Modified by Wavelength on 2015-02-18 20:57:27 GrimJ0ker | 2015-02-19 16:57:33 |
Hearthsone is a 45% luck - 55% skills, spectromancer at least 30% luck - 70% skills.
spectromancer at least 30% luck - 70% skills. do you mean at least 70% skill (perhaps more) or do you mean at least 30% luck (perhaps more) ?
i think 20% luck - 80% skill would sound about right in my opinion
Modified by filip on 2015-02-19 20:09:02 Theodorus | 2015-02-19 21:12:36 |
Hearthsone is a 45% luck - 55% skills, spectromancer at least 30% luck - 70% skills. Hearthstone 90% luck-10% skill Spectro 10% luck- 90% skill now is better
Jeronimo | 2015-02-20 11:57:42 |
Hearthsone is a 45% luck - 55% skills, spectromancer at least 30% luck - 70% skills. i think 20% luck - 80% skill would sound about right in my opinion
Spectromancer: 25% luck - 75% skill Chess: 100% skill Goose Game: 100% luck
GrimJ0ker | 2015-02-20 16:49:32 |
yeah agree with this....25% luck - 75% skill. (i meant 70% perhaps more).
Wavelength | 2015-02-21 04:32:18 |
I would call Spectro 97% skill, 3% luck, in any game that doesn't include Chaos/Goblin/Hermit/Golem, and still probably 80% skill in a matchup with what I consider to be the most luck-based matchup (Goblin vs. Golem). Hidden information doesn't close the door on skill, and decision under uncertainty can still very much be skill if it is feasible to assume some of that information from the opponent's play, and Spectromancer excels at making that available. What might look like luck ("does he have Stone Rain?") can instead be a matter of skill, either by figuring out whether your opponent has something or by forcing their hand into not using it. When an opponent pulls out a Magister of Blood, for example, I usually have one of two reactions: "What?!" or "Yeah, should have prepared better for that." In both cases I truly believe that the game was winnable and I simply didn't play as well as my opponent - the second case being obvious and the first case being a matter of incorrectly reading their play and their intentions and assuming they actually had Vampire Elder. I've got to say - losing and knowing it was because I didn't perform well enough isn't such a bad feeling, unlike feeling like I got cheated by bad design, bad RNG luck, or idiotic teammates. For that matter I'd probably consider Hearthstone (very) slightly more skill-based than luck-based, but "grind" has a big place in that game too. You don't start out on equal footing with your opponent even if you have the same luck on your side. One of the biggest problems with that game is the inherent imbalances between classes (I imagine there are a lot of matchups that exceed 60/40 even if the overall class is batting 50%), which is the point I was making when CyberneticPony asserted he was quitting because some kind of bizarre perceived class imbalance in Spectromancer. Modified by Wavelength on 2015-02-24 19:32:24 srbhkshk | 2015-02-24 19:19:50 |
probably 890% skill in a matchup with what I consider to be the most luck-based matchup (Goblin vs. Golem).
Well, thats a lot of skill. Wavelength | 2015-02-24 19:32:11 |
... Well, thats a lot of skill.
It's still UNDER NIIIINE THOUSAND, so it's POSSIBLE! :D I'll correct that. Meant to write "80%". GrimJ0ker | 2015-02-25 15:33:48 |
I think that 3% of luck is very few with respect to the randomness of the cards, matchups, 1% rule broken and all the other small odds of certain classes, but anyway it's still remain a very good ratio skill/luck. Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2015-02-25 15:35:25 srbhkshk | 2015-02-25 16:03:20 |
I'd put it at a straight 10%, games where I feel I couldn't have done anything come often enough but not nearly enough times for me to really worry about it.
Wavelength | 2015-02-25 23:55:30 |
I think that 3% of luck is very few with respect to the randomness of the cards, matchups, 1% rule broken and all the other small odds of certain classes, but anyway it's still remain a very good ratio skill/luck. There's probably no right answer to this, but the way I view it, the randomness of your initial draw in Spectromancer (in combination with the mechanic where the concept of a turn replaces the concept of a "card") actually pushes it further toward skill than luck. In constructed CCGs one deck will often start with a large comparative advantage over another and nothing can be done about it. In Spectromancer, you start with a hand that almost always has some cards that will perform well and others that will perform poorly against the opponent, and you have the choice to exclusively play those cards multiple times. You get to decide how you want to react to the initial position, instead of being confined to a relatively narrow and similar set of plays. Occasionally you're making these decisions under extreme uncertainty, which, yes, is essentially luck. But much more often, I think there's enough information available that you can make good or bad decisions about how to direct the game, even if the future isn't deterministic. I think Cooler mentioned that the AI was taught similar to Backgammon AIs (looking at large numbers of games to ascertain what works and what does not) rather than Chess AIs (predicting each subsequent move for each current possible move, and playing it out twenty or thirty moves down the line to see who would win), and I agree with this approach - you have to get a feel for "what works" in a given situation instead of trying to determine with certainty what will happen.
Wavelength | 2015-02-26 00:06:50 |
By the way, another interesting (and in my opinion closely related) question would be how much skill is involved
in the bonus round from "Flamingo Fortune" (an old game show). There
was a contestant that would either take 1, 2, or 3 steps each turn, and
if they reached the 6th through 8th steps the game would end (the 6th
step gave a nice cash prize but the 7th a bigger one and the 8th the
biggest of all). Meanwhile, each turn a champion would set a booby-trap ("bomb")
under one of the three possible steps the contestant would move to. If
the contestant hit the bomb, they didn't progress on that turn, and if
they hit the bomb twice then they're out and the champion wins cash instead. This game could be played and theoretically won with completely random moves, but it is not quite like "Rock, Paper, Scissors" because each of the moves has a different payoff. 3 steps brings you closer to the cash, so against a random AI the contestant should pick it every time. But the champion knows this, so he's probably going to booby-trap the 3rd step more often than not. So the contestant should then pick 2 steps, except of course the champion can figure this out too... How much luck is involved in a game like that, and how much "skill" or strategy is involved? You could say it's 100% luck because it's impossible to solve or reduce to anything better than a large set of very weak Nash Equilibriums. You could say it's 100% skill because the outcome is purely based on decisions rather than RNGs or dice. I'd call this kind of decision under large uncertainly about 70% skill (and the Decisions Under Uncertainty in Spectromancer, which produce clearer advantages and disadvantages for mana, board control, life, etc., would be more like 90% skill), which might give you guys insight over why I'd consider the game overall (since there are some deterministic elements) to come in at around 97%. What do you guys think about a game like this?
Modified by Wavelength on 2015-02-26 00:07:03 Wavelength | 2015-02-26 00:19:23 |
One more interesting thought: Is Chess 100% skill?
My instinct is that yes, Chess is 100% skill. There is no risk and no uncertainty. In theory, you can trace all of the possible moves that will result from a move at some point in the game and create a path that will create a win in every scenario. Thankfully, the daunting number of possibilities that you'd have to calculate even ten turns in advance makes the game impossible to solve - at least for now.
This is the way that I understand it, at least. I'm not that
familiar with Chess theory. If anyone is, can you weigh in on this? Is
the game such that literally every move from the beginning of a
"perfectly"-played game has a counter-move, so that there are lots of
moves for both players that would lead to a win only in certain opponent movesets and would lead to a loss in others, meaning that the equilibrium in a perfectly-played game would be a stalemate?
A simpler game, like Tic-Tac-Toe, is also 100% skill, but is poorly designed because the small number of possible plays makes it an easily-solved game, and at this point you are just going through motions. It's not a game, it's a chore. Connect Four is much, much harder to solve (making it fun to play casually for most adults), but this too has been done. You will never, ever get a professional scene for Connect Four.
So I'm glad that Spectromancer has this Decision Making Under Uncertainty, and, for as long as Spectromancer is a well-designed game (where no one choice outweighs all others in all situations), it cannot be 100% skill. I love that about the game. But my point in my two posts above was that the Decisions Under Uncertainty in Spectromancer contain enough reasoning and weighing of benefits-versus-drawbacks, as well as enough space for "psychology" and bluffing, for these decisions to contribute a ton of skill and only a small amount of luck to the equation.
Tendou | 2015-02-27 16:58:29 |
Gomoku(connect 5) is also solved, the starting player has a winning strategy. In an all information game there are 2 outcomes which are possbile.1: There is a winning strategy for the player whom has advantage at the start(mostly the starting player in abstract games) of the matches. Or 2: There is no winning strategy to anyone which means that the game will always end up in a draw if played by 2 optimal computers. The second one is highly likely to be the case of chess, because there is a significant amount of draws in high level competitions and people can learn how to make the matches lean toward draw after they realize they cant win. In case the game is leaning towards draw i would argue that the game itself may reflect a bad design because the first plenty moves might be the same every time at the highest level and therefore the setup should have included such steps. So if there are too many choices above an optimal amount then there might not be any real good choices, just different ones to react to differently. Moreover i would argue that because there is no other solution to an all information game except those two which i mentioned above that all information games are just basically interactive puzzles and only FEEL like games. Spectro would face the same destiny just like tic-tac-toe if the starting cards were to be revealed before the start to each players.
Sinist | 2015-03-08 14:24:20 |
3% luck probably flatters Spectro a bit. Unfortunately situations when opponent has game changing card (for example, chaos 8, or blood 7-8, or sorcery 5, or cult 6) summoned and you just happened to have no counter in your deck, happen quite frequently... Maybe it is just my bad luck though. Also, bad healing vs illusion or golem or forest or any rush deck makes you screwed
3% luck probably flatters Spectro a bit. Unfortunately situations when opponent has game changing card (for example, chaos 8, or blood 7-8, or sorcery 5, or cult 6) summoned and you just happened to have no counter in your deck, happen quite frequently... Maybe it is just my bad luck though. Also, bad healing vs illusion or golem or forest or any rush deck makes you screwed And on the other side of the coin, when you are playing a rush class, if the opponent draws great healing, then you are screwed. There are many draws where some cards are just difficult to deal with. It's hard to really say when luck comes into play versus skill in actual game play. Could a more skilled player have predicted the card in time to deal with it better? Could a more skilled player use a more unconventional approach to deal with it? Counter it? Or is that player just suffering from a plague of bad luck fever (or the good luck boogie!)? Where does luck stop, and skill begin? The luck factor is mostly in the draw, I would say. Sometimes you are just dealt a crapy hand, other times you luck out and the cards just mesh together well. But regardless of the draw, it takes skill to use the cards well. A great draw in the hands of a rookie does not always pan out. And sometimes a lackluster set in the hands of a master can end up wining with ease. I wouldn't dare try to guess the "luck percentile," but I would venture to say that it is rather low, especial compared to other games running on a similar platform. ShadowofMordor | 2015-04-10 08:02:17 |
... Estarh said he's going to tweak the game balance soon. However, we're quite limited in changes: only those that don't require new IOS binary will be made.
Hi, are there any news about that? At least a preview of the changes? Cheers! SoM
Ruby456 | 2015-04-17 12:59:06 |
Let ALSE PLAYERS WEAKER MORE Than U Grim Joker wins width Chronomancer CLass ( Just U must go to LeveL 40 and ALSE PLayers
must Be Lowe LeveL's 8 9 10 and 11 ? ) Nott Fear at ALL .... I disagree width U !!! and this because we Have ONE CLass a LIttLe more Strong
butt Just in GOOD Hands of PLayers in LeveL's 20 + this cLass seems be Strong ...Time 1 is VeryWeak ...
ShadowofMordor | 2015-04-17 15:00:26 |
Let ALSE PLAYERS WEAKER MORE Than U Grim Joker wins width Chronomancer CLass ( Just U must go to LeveL 40 and ALSE PLayers must Be Lowe LeveL's 8 9 10 and 11 ? ) Nott Fear at ALL .... I disagree width U !!! and this because we Have ONE CLass a LIttLe more Strong butt Just in GOOD Hands of PLayers in LeveL's 20 + this cLass seems be Strong ...Time 1 is VeryWeak ...
Wow ... personally I believe Time 1 is a very good card for its cost, even stronger after its last balance change. SoM
Ruby456 | 2015-04-17 22:47:12 |
U aLLright HeadphonesGirL nobody's know what weeL be Changing in Chrono CLass
|