Author Topic: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1  (Read 12463 times)

Offline -tHeGaMe-

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #15 on: July 03, 2014, 10:09:18 AM »
Great post Teremus. I would offer you some delicious cheese but alas I ate it all  :-[

Time to play -tHeGaMe-

Offline Thechynd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 442
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #16 on: July 03, 2014, 10:30:26 AM »
I never said anything about nerfing nothing. I tried to explain this concept as clearly as possible, and I'm fairly certain I failed.

Fair enough. I apparently misunderstood as there were two sections that seemed to suggest you wanted to reduce Veroria's toolkit whilst avoiding actually nerfing the biggest contributors to that toolkit.

Quote
Most people might say "Mass Death" "Death Ray" "Veroria" are the "Problems" with Verore. The fact of the matter is much larger. When discussing Balance you can't just point out a single card and say "This is really strong! Nerf it!" in most cases that will tip the scales in another direction.

Quote
Nerfing Mass Death or nerfing Veroria doesn't change the concept of their Toolkit, the Toolkit itself needs to be looked at to reduce it's overall capabilities in such a wide variety of scenarios.

Offline Dreamplume

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
  • Dream of a Dreamplume
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #17 on: July 03, 2014, 10:42:57 AM »
Your talk about verore tool kit is interesting because it really is not about single cards within the faction but the overall range of what is available to use, it is like have 100 hundred spells and each individual one has an answer to a problem. Someone also said Rock, Paper, Scissors is a good concept I have played many games with that concept in mind and those games ended up scrapping the concept because you can easily one side it. So when everyone is using paper you beat some people fair enough but everyone can suddenly change to scissors beating you every time till you change. As lightmare strive towards a player controlled Meta goes without saying wouldn't they be able to control the RPS.

Another way I can see this is will a person have what's needed for there deck to supposedly beat this other deck even though they are scissors against paper. I now that it is going to be more complex so I am trying to view it in a stage of only rock, paper and scissors as three factions let say or three decks.

Faction 1 Rock - beats 3
Faction 2 Paper - beats 1
Faction 3 Scissors - beats 2

Now if I look at it for Infinity Wars from above it can go backwards resulting in rock beating paper for lets say a reason paper does not have the available cards needed to fight the rock faction/or deck making it go in multiple directions. Would that be the kind of RPS system lightmare could or would strive towards in wanting to balance the game.

I am not sure if I made sense hopefully I did a bit as it clear to me in my mind just hope I can make some insight for everyone to see what I see.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2014, 10:48:42 AM by Dreamplume »

Offline Teremus

  • Really Cool Moose
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5545
  • Hide your cheese.
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #18 on: July 03, 2014, 10:46:46 AM »
The toolkit itself isn't about a single card, it's about their abilities to respond to various scenarios.

As I stated in the article, verore has the ability to bypass critical thinking where other factions would be forced into such mindsets. Reducing or raising the power level of certain things doesn't affect the fact that they have the "Option" where other factions flat out don't.

Hence why I said the concept is much larger than discussing a single card. :)
No seriously, I really like cheese.

Quote from: Poga
I make this game, James.

Offline Qweeg

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #19 on: July 03, 2014, 10:47:47 AM »
...and I'm fairly certain I failed.

I'm talking about a very broad, overarcing ideology. I am, never, talking about one specific concept that needs to be changed or altered. Simply a train of thought, that guides us through each decision and how we approach various topics.


I don't think you failed at all.  I thought it was an interesting blog post looking at high level concepts and problems associated with balance.  The ideal of allowing the community to find solutions to perceived balance issues in the first instance, and only after that if there is still a problem stepping in to look at how best to solve it seems dead right to me. And you made some really interesting points and observations in there.

Thank you for taking to the time to write this - I look forward to future posts.

Q

Offline -tHeGaMe-

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #20 on: July 03, 2014, 11:55:07 AM »
phase out verore. problem solved  :P

Time to play -tHeGaMe-

Offline chaosangel2112

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 667
  • Fire for Effect!
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #21 on: July 03, 2014, 01:36:35 PM »
Use the force dudes and read the blog.  Its a generalized talk on LM's stance towards balance.  Talented people with the inside scoop on where they want to go with things.  If creating amd balancing a DTCG was easy we'd all have our own.  Failing all that, beware, he might go Darth Moose on us all. ;)

Offline TimetoSplit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #22 on: July 03, 2014, 01:40:00 PM »
I think the main problem people have with Verore comes back to plain old counterplay - if we feel counterplay is too difficult against a given card, it becomes frustrating to many players.  Mass Death and Death Ray are excellent because they can always be dodged.

Offline The_Fallen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #23 on: July 03, 2014, 05:05:33 PM »
Tbh I'm not very happy with this post, as it is mostly general talk.  Much more specific details would be very appreciated: For example the discussion about 2 purity for token generating cards, bloodthirst and its strange behaviour or the struggle about Enyah. I' know you can't say that this cards will be like this in the next patch, but you could point out the pro/contra arguments discussed by lightmare.

About the verore topic: Did anybody just think for a moment, that there are so many counters to verore? In fact every faction has them. As an addition, verore is the faction with the most luck involved. Imagine for example flipping a coin and reduce your 6/6 demon to a 2/2... yeah big deal compared to a missed mass death, just because the other player did not choose to attack at this moment. So next turn you probably die.
If the whole gamplay mechanic was turn based (tradtional), I would aggree that with that many removals verore has the upper hand. But this way you have no guaranted kill, even annihilate can be deflectet and so on. Even oblivion has its restrictions.
 The statement: "The Cult has a lot of answers, responses, and options available to them that are able to simply bypass strategy and critical thinking in situations..." is simply outrageous. You need to be able to make a psychological profile of your enemy in the first few turns and predict his movements and then apply counter measures. And please explain to me how you can counter an Call of the crusade on my initative or a deflect, or charge/vigilance characters? ( I assume you don't have 20 massdeaths in your deck to play one every turn after getting 6 ressources.)
Conclusion: I know verore bashing is in, but please consider what you say, as many will now further pressure you into nerfing verore quoting the same statment I did and maybe the one with the toolkit.

Still waiting. Hope declining.

For bugfixing information: Proud Windows XP User

Offline TimetoSplit

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #24 on: July 03, 2014, 07:36:27 PM »
The_Fallen - the "luck" thing is a two-way road.  You say that the Verore player can lose the game simply because they did not play Mass Death at the right time.  Likewise, the Warpath player can lose because they decided to attack on a given turn, and they lose all their characters and lose the game.  Both players must predict one another.  Of course, you can go "partially" in (sending in some but not all) but then you only gain a partial benefit/partial risk.  It's a relational game between the Verore and the non-Verore player.

Offline Teremus

  • Really Cool Moose
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5545
  • Hide your cheese.
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #25 on: July 04, 2014, 01:23:19 AM »
Quote from: The_Fallen
Conclusion: I know verore bashing is in, but please consider what you say, as many will now further pressure you into nerfing verore quoting the same statment I did and maybe the one with the toolkit.

They can pressure me all they want, that doesn't mean it's going to be changed. I didn't discuss verore because a bunch of people were QQ'ing about them, I discussed the guiding principles behind how Lightmare discusses balance in Infinity Wars. What you are saying regarding that line is also correct, however you're only discussing a single version of the story. I appreciate that side, however there's a much larger picture that we as Developer's have to be aware of.

There are many different sides to many different stories, and I was not discussing any single one of them. I was being very broad, very general, for a reason.

Much more specific concepts will be listed out by someone within our team on one of these blogs, I'm not the guy that does any of that and would be the worst person to make an article on that topic. So when the time comes, they will be the ones making that article.

I'm sorry you didn't like the article, I'm sure there will be some out there who don't like what I had to say.
No seriously, I really like cheese.

Quote from: Poga
I make this game, James.

Offline Heart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 604
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #26 on: July 04, 2014, 03:05:10 AM »
People still talking about verore and I'm just here qqing about overwhelming deads purity puffy :/
Follow your...

Offline Teremus

  • Really Cool Moose
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5545
  • Hide your cheese.
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #27 on: July 04, 2014, 05:43:10 AM »
People still talking about verore and I'm just here qqing about overwhelming deads purity puffy :/

Again, the blog wasn't about a single cards power level or buffing/nerfing anything. The article was about guiding principles and thought processes.
No seriously, I really like cheese.

Quote from: Poga
I make this game, James.

Offline Tyroki

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 496
  • The One
    • View Profile
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #28 on: July 04, 2014, 10:18:41 AM »
People still talking about verore and I'm just here qqing about overwhelming deads purity puffy :/

Again, the blog wasn't about a single cards power level or buffing/nerfing anything. The article was about guiding principles and thought processes.
Kinda thought that was obvious myself...
_________                           _________
      |___|                                 |___|   
  ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Thesis or riot! ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ

Offline Qfasa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 758
    • View Profile
    • русскоязычный сайт об Infinity Wars и других цифровых ККИ (Russian site about Infinity Wars and other digital TCGs).
Re: [Dev Blog] Moose Report #1
« Reply #29 on: July 04, 2014, 10:27:21 AM »
I have a very mixed feelings about this topic but maybe it because I don't have a full understanding of your ideas. From the one hand, I'm supporting your approach, because an idea of constant changes of every card in the game isn't good in my opinion.

From the other hand, you're looking at this situation from the position of physical card game with a billions of players, where any changes could bring huge consequences.

What I'm seeing in your message is "we were young, we made some mistakes. Now we are experienced and wise and we will fix mistakes of our past. But our new wisdom tell us that we should bring cards' changes to the minimum, so we'll go another way and you should wait until we reach our goal". Don't you think that in the current state of the game this is a little too much?

While you have a few thousands of active players at best, while the game in the beta, wouldn't it be better to be a bit less sensitive about your concepts and make those few changes which even veterans of IW consider to be necessary? In the full developed game with a lots of players and pro-players this is a bad idea I'm completely agree but for now there isn't such thing in IW as pro-players. There is barely a few hundreds of passionate fans who can understand why are you doing this.

Isn't now the best time to bring toolkits of all factions to a normal state by making moves which later will be impossible (or at least much harder) to make?

And I don't understand how you can fix the toolbox of Cult without changing any cards? Yes, the Cult has an answers to everything but their answers are their cards. You can change a card, you can remove a card and it will change their toolbox. Or, you can create a new situation (a strategy) and not to give to the Cult answers to that strategy which will definitely change an approach to how you should play it. Any other option?
www.TCGO.ru – русскоязычный сайт об Infinity Wars и других цифровых ККИ (Russian site about Infinity Wars and other digital TCGs).