Author Topic: Mechanism rarity  (Read 1852 times)

Offline Goldschuss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
  • Death Ray, I don't like you
    • View Profile
Mechanism rarity
« on: April 13, 2016, 10:34:35 AM »
So there have been some complaints about the rarity change to mechanism from rare to uncommon.

Looking at the card now, it actually makes more sense.
It's effect is nothing too special and hey, look at it once more...
This card somehow basically screams "I'm so common!!" to me. Why was it rare in the first place?
Heck, this card would even be a candidate for the first unlimited artifact ever.

Offline ToxicShadow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
    • View Profile
Re: Mechanism rarity
« Reply #1 on: April 13, 2016, 01:40:49 PM »
I think the concerns about the rarity changes of mechanism are more related to trade values than to its actual gameplay effects.

I am not a very active trader, but the way i understand it some cards derive their value mainly from their rarity and not from their actual gameplay effects (honestly some rare+ cards are so terrible that they wouldnt even be good commons).

 If cards now get moved inbetween rarities, then it is difficult to estimate their values correctly (if they are not awesome anyways) since the rarity (and with it the value) might change greatly in the future.

That being said, I am personally not very upset about moving mechanism down in rarity. Just don't make it unlimited, or we might end up with mechanism spam decks that can pull off a very early omnitron.

Offline zekses

  • Translator
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
    • View Profile
Re: Mechanism rarity
« Reply #2 on: April 13, 2016, 01:54:16 PM »
I could not care less about mechanism's rarity. It's the very concept of basing card rarity on Draft that irks me.

Offline Kevkas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
    • View Profile
Re: Mechanism rarity
« Reply #3 on: July 08, 2016, 04:43:17 AM »
I just saw this old thread, but I think that as a GI player AND as a GI premium collector, I can answer this question.

This card somehow basically screams "I'm so common!!" to me. Why was it rare in the first place?

Yes, Mechanism seems common.... now. The reason why Mechanism was a rare, and the reason it seems common now has a lot to do with Omnitron, and Omnimind as well. Omnitron is one of the most popular triple-GI strategies (if not THE most popular), and Mechanism is a card that has always been VERY useful to work your way up to deploying Omnitron. It is cheap, it gives you a nice +1/+1 buff (it's not much, but sometimes it can make a difference between saving a creature from dying to a spell, or effect like poison 1 for example), but the most important thing was the first one, it is cheap, as cheap as it gets for artifacts, and that means a lot when trying to get Omnitron into play.

That made Mechanism a good card, a VERY good card in fact, most artifacts you deploy don't always get used every turn, but Mechanism gives you a passive buff, you don't even have to pay to activate it. All those reasons made the card be a rare, and I think it was reasonable.

However, things changed when Omnimind was added to the game. Suddenly everyone could have mechanims in their support zone. Sure, they cost most if you create them through Omnimind, but Omnimind made (makes) more sense in many cases, it lowers the cost of artificial creatures, it can create Mechanisms, Unending Drones, and buff artificials too. In comparison, Mechanism suddenly seemed like it wasn't powerful enough to be considered a rare to some, but it still kept being a rare, because you couldn't deny that it still made things extremely cheap when trying to deploy Omnitron, and that's a huge advantage to any GI player.

And then... came draft balance... which leads me to what Zekses said:

I could not care less about mechanism's rarity. It's the very concept of basing card rarity on Draft that irks me.

Yodomare seem to balance draft using rarity of cards. Mechanism was showing up in the 'rare slot' when drafting decks, and that meant that the slot was being wasted on a cheap artifact that works brilliantly in an Omnitron deck... but you're not building an Omnitron deck in draft, are you? So why should Mechanism take the rare slot when you could be drafting something more rare-worthy like Unstable Bomb-bot, or Lanstead for example. So they decided to change Mechanism rarity to common...

This brough a ton of negative feedback, not only because they were using the rarity system to solve balancing issues in a format that should rely on something different to balance itself (this is still true to this day), but also because traders and collectors had been trading Mechanisms for years (literaly) as a rare. Heck, I myself have traded and bought platfoil Mechanisms, and every time I traded/payed for them as 'rares'.

All that negative feedback ended up making Yodomare change its rarity from common to uncommon. It's something... but a lot of players (including myself) ended up taking things like this like a slap in the face, cause after +2 years suddenly this rare wasn't a rare anymore, and in a 'trading' card game, changing card rarities means chaging card values, and changing card values after 2 years.... well, that's just horribly wrong, and very unprofessional if you ask me. Why do I say unprofessional? Because if you're going to call your game a 'trading' card game (among other features) then you need to stick to what you publish unless there's a VERY good reason to change that... and balancing draft through rarity wasn't one, wasn't even a decent reason because as I said before, draft should be balanced differently, a card rarity shouldn't have to be forced just because of one format.

Anyway, in the end Mechanism ended up becoming an uncommon, which is the current state of the card. Personally I'd like it to go to where it was before, a rare, but I know that isn't going to happen so why bother... >.>

Offline MerliniX

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1398
    • View Profile
Re: Mechanism rarity
« Reply #4 on: July 08, 2016, 05:22:00 AM »
To be fair plat foil mechanism is exactly as rare now as it was when mechanism was a rare - and plat mechanism too.

Offline Kevkas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
    • View Profile
Re: Mechanism rarity
« Reply #5 on: July 08, 2016, 03:51:24 PM »
To be fair plat foil mechanism is exactly as rare now as it was when mechanism was a rare - and plat mechanism too.

That is true, though the point of my answer is that people had been trading a card as a rare (regardless of premium type) for more than 2 years, and suddenly it became a common (and then an uncommon). A trading card game shouldn't change a card rarity after two years, I think we can all agree on that.

Offline Pelagoth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 606
  • Sock Puppet
    • View Profile
Re: Mechanism rarity
« Reply #6 on: July 09, 2016, 12:36:18 PM »
To be fair plat foil mechanism is exactly as rare now as it was when mechanism was a rare - and plat mechanism too.

That is true, though the point of my answer is that people had been trading a card as a rare (regardless of premium type) for more than 2 years, and suddenly it became a common (and then an uncommon). A trading card game shouldn't change a card rarity after two years, I think we can all agree on that.
I honestly think that many cards are classified as the wrong rarity and for a relaunch there very well could be a redistribution of card rarities. Example: Why is Fiery Wish, Heavenly Wish, Undeath Wish and Dark Wish seperated by rarities? Make one an epic, make all an epic.

I might make a list of all the cards and their "rightful" rarities, based on my own understanding of card mechanics in direct comparison to their rarity. Another example: Descension very well may be an Epic since it's a dragon and most if not all dragons are epic.

Ofcourse such changes would have a huge impact on the trade market and probably can't be considered executable for the sake of economical balance, but they were assigned to the wrong rarity to begin with. I am also aware of pauper cards, so something like Sacullas (that'd deserve to be a rare) would remain as an uncommon.

Offline Kevkas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
    • View Profile
Re: Mechanism rarity
« Reply #7 on: July 10, 2016, 12:06:05 AM »
I honestly think that many cards are classified as the wrong rarity and for a relaunch there very well could be a redistribution of card rarities. Example: Why is Fiery Wish, Heavenly Wish, Undeath Wish and Dark Wish seperated by rarities? Make one an epic, make all an epic.

I might make a list of all the cards and their "rightful" rarities, based on my own understanding of card mechanics in direct comparison to their rarity. Another example: Descension very well may be an Epic since it's a dragon and most if not all dragons are epic.

Ofcourse such changes would have a huge impact on the trade market and probably can't be considered executable for the sake of economical balance, but they were assigned to the wrong rarity to begin with. I am also aware of pauper cards, so something like Sacullas (that'd deserve to be a rare) would remain as an uncommon.

Not every similar card needs to be the same rarity, I wouldn't make Fiery Wish an epic, and I wouldn't make Dark Wish a rare, I think they are fine where they are. Regardless of this though, cause we may have different opinions on where they belong, the point is that if Infinity Wars prides itself in being a 'trading' card game, then they need to honor it. If they have released a card a very long time ago, then it shouldn't be changed, that doesn't mean they get the rarity right at the moment of its release, but it's one thing to change a recently released card rarity, for example changing its rarity within the first... 2 to 4 months perhaps? 6 months at the most... but it's a whole different thing changing it after 2 years.

What bothers me is that IW is a trading card game, yet trading is an aspect of the game that always seems to get the shaft (trade interface, no auction house, change in rarities, and core premiums were a whole topic of discussion during several years, and rightly so). The game needs a good trade interface (a topic currently being discussed in another thread), but it also needs stability when it comes to cards. I'm all in favor of having a grace period after a new card has been released during which people should know beforehand that a new card rarity could be changed, so if they trade it during that perior it's up to the player, but after that time the card rarity shouldn't be touched anymore.

A different but related topic is the fact that in this case, Mechanism rarity was changed to balance draft, which I think it's absurd, cards should have a hidden assigned attribute that allows it to show up or not during draft, and a % chance to determine how frequently it shows up.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2016, 12:12:50 AM by Kevkas »

Offline Pelagoth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 606
  • Sock Puppet
    • View Profile
Re: Mechanism rarity
« Reply #8 on: July 10, 2016, 02:41:29 AM »
Wether or not you agree is irrelevant of how a card design is designated to a rarity. You can't have a card X being different rarity than card Y, when both almost fulfill the same role (the wishes in this case). I do agree though that changing card rarity at that high rarity and such high demand is going to cause dramatic effects for the people possessing the cards. However, we are also experiencing a huge imbalance in card values as it is in terms of SUPER CHEAP DLCs, reduced LP cost in the store (especially scaling up) and higher drop rates of epics/legs in packs and drafts. You are witnessing a devalution of your collection as we progress right now, but that's a different topic. Changing the rarities of cards, is not as dramatic as those effects I just mentioned. You will notice it more, once the community grows (I hope it does).

A different but related topic is the fact that in this case, Mechanism rarity was changed to balance draft, which I think it's absurd, cards should have a hidden assigned attribute that allows it to show up or not during draft, and a % chance to determine how frequently it shows up.
This has been mentioned before and devs noticed that suggestion, not sure what they made of the idea though.