Close

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12
  1. #11
    plo
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by plo View Post
    I would have no problem with this, as long as it is confined to games against the AI. My reason is as follows>

    As Samzyn has pointed out, they can be made in a way that makes players build good decks around them, as in the example he gave. But even so I don`t like the idea. From my experience with TCG there are 2 stereotipes of players, one does not care about flavor or fun and puts whatever card makes he win while the other disregards winning completely.

    From my perspective this proposal would approach move players towards the second spectrum. It would make players who can make an unbeatble and unstoppable deck include cards that are not the best option, thus making a weakier deck and the game becoming less competitive.
    Quote Originally Posted by Samzyn View Post
    Well it all depends on the nature of the achievements. For example, one of the achievements for Selfishness could be that you need to win 30 games with the card on the board (see above). This would promote the use of the card in effective decks. No one is going to intentionally lose a game 100 times just to get alt art for one card (remember that's actually 400 times because you'll have 4 of the card in deck), people will try and use them in effective decks simply because they can play more of that card. Your suggestion of the achievements only counting in games that you win or draw is another way to combat that, although I don't think that's necessary.

    I've seen this in concept added to other games with very successful outcomes including boost in the game's popularity, the diversity of play style in ranked games, and the feeling of personalization of the player's inventory.
    There are competitive players who include undervalued cards in their decks, like Iclipse included Healing Touch to his WC deck, and iirc he himself said it was one of the most undervalued cards.

    Now the reason he did this is not (I will suppose) to get any "achievement", to mock the opponent, or to be funny, but because he thought it would make his deck the most competitive as possible.

    The problem is not just when players include "bad" cards on their decks, but the problem is when they think the card will make their deck weaker and even so they include the card just to get the achievement. It would be no problem if he were including a very weak card thinking it's a good card.

    And another problem with this is that many players may not finish off the opponent when they have the chance just to get the reward, For example a Mage has enough resources to cast his Fireball while the opponent is a Hunter with 3 health, but even so he will decide to wait the next turn only so he gets a chance to summon Selfishness to get his reward. The Hunter might summon a Spelleater Bands amd defeat the Mage because of this.

    So what do you think? From my reasoning above it is obvious that the achievemnts will make players include cards they know will make their deck less competitive, and do moves they know are not the most competitive possible, thus becoming less competitive.

  2. #12
    DP Visionary Preybird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    9,046
    Tournaments Joined
    1
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I think an achievement system is a great idea personally, whether it be linked to individual cards or heroes or activity or win rate or all of the above. Promotes play and more importantly varied play.
    Extra Tough Claws - Proud Member of ETC

    Articles | Decklist | Fan Fiction

    Shadow Era Art Thread | PB @ DeviantArt

    PFG Member | I've been interviewed!

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •