What's your take on these factors at play within a game?

[Caitlyn0]

very nice read Osiris

[SWAT0013]

I am basically very content with influence of all factors on winning as all factors help you win more but on the other hand with some exceptions no factor gives you so big advantage that other player would be unable to win.

But as was stated in other topic and there - I must agree with quite a lot players that now biggest issue is overnerfing of cards. I really liked diversity of this game, but right now I have impression that thanks to all that nerfing to the ground we maybe have the most balanced state of game ever, but on the other hand fighting against same decks/ideas over and over is not something what should be aim of this game. Look at poor Aramia as an example - first you took away all strong cards she had until you realized cards were not the problem, Aramia was. So now we have nerfed basically all 3cc useful items and also Aramia - so no one is using Aramia because all useful decks were killed by these changes and with exception of some really needed (usually tribal) or unchanged items I have impression that 3cc items are also played very little...
On the other hand Sabreen is awesome example how nerf should look - you changed it so that she is not OP, but she is still strong and useful, I hope we will get more changes like this

Locations are chapters for itself - like I stated before LL, I think locations would be awesome addition to campaign, I just do not see way to kind of balance them in PvP - they will always be either too weak and almost non used or too strong and used everywhere...

[Gondorian]

i think it is difficult to answer these questions because it is very unclear exactly what you want answers on in your opening post. and it is also difficult to know which factors most contributes to the outcome of the match. everything is very subjective so i dont know if any of this will help you much.

Hi, mindy. I was not looking for anything objective - every player is unique and I was expecting a collection of subjective responses. In terms of what kinds of answers I am looking for, you could look at each factor I listed and mention those that you think it have too much or too little influence on a match outcome and then say how important that is to you.

e.g. I think luck plays too big a part in this game and deckcrafting skill is not required as much as it could be. As someone who likes making my own decks and influencing the outcomes mostly through crafting and playing skill, the high luck factor is reducing my enjoyment.

[BP LORD WANE]

Hello Gondorian! This is an excelent topic, tnx for made it!

In my opinion, this is the way to improve this game that i think 90% of us LOYAL and competitive players love.

I ll give a note of 1-5 (where 1 is horrible and 5 is excelent) about eatch point that u told, and put my point of view and some sugestion (if i have) on each point. Lets go:



* the influence of player skill (i.e. calculating the best moves based on the situation you are in) on winning

NOTE: 5. For me this point is perfect as it is. This factor is really importante and it is on the right way. The player skill make diference, ofc, but it isnt a garanteed victory, because we have others factories too. I think this is realy good.
* the influence of deckcrafting skill (i.e. making your own stuff rather than copying others) on winning

NOTE: 3,5. This is an important point. Is good atm, but can be amazing good, if we dont have too much dead cards, really useless cards, and ofc if we dont have a lot of unfair and total nonsense nerfs. I think the devenlopers must to listen more the COMPETITIVE AND LOYAL players that really play Shadow era eatch day, and not just give importance for PFG (i dont know the right name of that foccused group). We have a lot of cards, but as i told, a huge part of it are dead, and this leave us limited to make a more variety of real competitives decks.

* the influence of meta-knowledge (i.e. knowing what the popular strong decks are) on winning

NOTE: 2. Again i cant leave to speak about NERFS. We dont have any problem to think in some deck to counter some deck or combo, because everybody know that deck will be nerfed (or at leas key cards). I think this is a good point to improve. My single and honest sugestion is: stop to nerf A LOT OF CARDS. Stop to put the game just on a stylle deck way. For example: last update we had a lot of control cards nerfed, with this we had more and more agroo decks on meta and few control decks winning tournaments and on high rating. "Oh wane, so, we will nerf agroo cards..." NOOOOOO plz not, this isnt the pois, just balance the game with NEW cards not changing that existent cards.


* the influence of player experience (i.e. knowing the strength/weakness of more heroes and situations) on winning

NOTE 4: This is a cool point too. Here we have scout, and knowledge about the game and oponents, like: how some oponent play, what kind of most used decks, how to tech against some hero or deck. This point is really good!


* the influence of luck within the game on winning (i.e. getting the right cards at the right times and opponent getting opposite!)

NOTE 5: hahhaha, the famous top deck. This is really perfect, lucky doenst decide games every time, but, some times shit happens in ur favor or against u.


* the influence of luck of the match-up on winning (e.g. meeting decks you expect to beat)

NOTE 5: Another good point. Here the lucky isnt in ur side, u must to bring it for ur side. This point is linked with the PLAYER EXPERIENCE POINT, if u scout, know your oponent, your deck, the chances to face a deck that u ll have advantage is really good, if not, ll be a real lotery.


* the variety of decks and cards you might face

NOTE 2,5: Again the nerfs are the vilans here. WE are always limited on a few decks with personal variations. For example: I run a RUSH LOEST, i use tome of knowlodge and my friend use bad santa to draw, i use LLN on main deck he dont. Just this. But with nerfs variety isnt the strongness of shadowera because the useless nerfs. Just for clarification, on 3.12 version, we had almost ALL HEROES and a HUGE part of LOST LAND cards run in a lot of decks, now what do we have: 90% of the LANDS useless, heroes that was really good like Jerry, or heroes that was beginning used like LOGANNNNNN are now trash again. I am now crying about that nerfs, because i am trying ressurect Jerry (and u all can see my last games with it), but is really hard make it strong again as he was.


* flavor, themes, humor, lore and much more

NOTE 4: This is ok, Not mutch to comment. (PS: Eternal Troll is really amazing fun image, ehehehee.

CONCLUSION: We have good thinks in shadow era, competicion bethween guilds, players, and we have a huge potencial with us, devenlopers could care less about nerfs and bring more NEW thinks to counter some special cards, thinks to change mechanic (like lands supsed had to do, but because nerfs they didnt), less delay to bring new thinks will help to. Less care about opinion of non competitives players. A good idea is: like some MMORPG games, we have normal world and a NON-PVP world. We can apply the same think here: a server with a lot of nerfs, and a hardcore server with combos, no nerfed cards. Or, if a card is consider "OP" just limit his use (max 2 or 1 copy in a deck), in this case will be nice have real op cards.
Just my opinion.

[ermelsilphion]

* the influence of deckcrafting skill (i.e. making your own stuff rather than copying others) on winning
* the variety of decks and cards you might face

These two.

Absolutely I'd avoid getting LUCK in the game as a factor, I'd have it just as a "fun chance"

The more variety, both on deckcrafting and the chacne of getting MANY different decks and strategy makes the game enjoable and longeval.

Just my 2 cents,
mm75

[SL Osiris]

very nice read Osiris

Thanks cait I tried and for the record I agree with you on all fronts.

[Gondorian]

Thanks for more replies.

To those who are complaining about nerfs (or thinking of complaining about them here), maybe you can refer to how those nerfs are negatively affecting the factors I listed?

Specifically, where do you think we would be in terms of player skill, deckcrafting skill, required meta-knowledge, value of player experience, impact of luck of the draw, impact of luck of the match-up, variety of decks and cards we would see if the nerfs you are against had not taken place?

Maybe it would help if I described where we were aiming to go with those nerfs? It's my belief that OP cards:
* reduce player skill required (just use the OP cards)
* reduce deckcrafting skill required (just copy the top OP decks or use the obviously OP cards)
* reduce meta-knowledge required (the best decks are so prevalent and well-known)
* reduce the value of player experience (exploiting OP cards reduces the need to think on your feet because they are hard for opponent to stop)
* increase luck of the draw (each player is hoping to get that edge by having a better start in the game)
* don't really affect the luck of the match-up significantly
* limit the variety of decks and cards you see (even with strong cards out there, OP stuff will be more popular)

We saw all this play out in 3.11 and 3.12, and I am really sorry that happened. I know there are other games out there where they are OK with those kinds of issues (or even aim to have them for money-making reasons), but that's not what we're aiming for.

Does this mean I don't think there should be any buffs? Not at all. We can still aim for more viable cards with buffs/rejigs in future versions. I just don't think keeping OP cards is the way to go, so the nerfs happened.

TL;DR: Refer to the factors I mentioned in the OP. Don't just complain about nerfs - there are other threads for that.

Side note: You will get a lot more traction with your feedback if you propose buffs for future versions (taking into consideration all cards that you think aren't good enough) rather than complain about nerfs that already happened to a small set of cards - and I don't mean buffs that just revert a nerf.

[Ross013]

For me the most important part is a stable meta. Being able to read the meta and build accordingly is where I find the most enjoyment. In my opinion, we are lacking a stable meta in SE, due to the constant changes being made to cards. A lot of people say about the meta getting stagnant and not changing, but I believe the opposite to be true. A lot of changes get called for simply because people have had enough of seeing certain decks, when in reality people could be building decks that will be a success and then in turn, evolving the meta. When so many things get changed, it leads to a meta that's very very unpredictable, sometimes changing in a matter of a day or two.

The other area I feel we are lacking is lore. My favourite tcg is mtg (shock horror) and one of the biggest draws to that is the way they design everything around a story. Each card, each mechanic, each creature is a character, each detail has something to do with whatever story they are telling with the set.
I feel like we have very little of that in shadow era, and to that end, the cards feel somewhat meaningless.

[jacqui]

[factors] for an enjoyable experience within each game
* the influence of player skill (i.e. Calculating the best moves based on the situation you are in) on winning
having an influence on the game result based on decisions increases fun factor.
* the influence of deckcrafting skill (i.e. Making your own stuff rather than copying others) on winning
more options in deckbuilding increase fun factor.
* the influence of meta-knowledge (i.e. Knowing what the popular strong decks are) on winning
meta knowledge is irrelevant to fun factor
* the influence of player experience (i.e. Knowing the strength/weakness of more heroes and situations) on winning
same thing as player skill.
* the influence of luck within the game on winning (i.e. Getting the right cards at the right times and opponent getting opposite!)
there should always be some amount of luck. This creates variance which is fun.
* the influence of luck of the match-up on winning (e.g. Meeting decks you expect to beat)
meeting decks that are auto-wins/auto-losses based on matchup is not fun.
* the variety of decks and cards you might face
the more variety the more fun. The less variety the less fun.
* flavor, themes, humor, lore and much more
the more the merrier

imo

[Phantom]

There should be more location cards added. Maybe they will be used more then. I play countless games throughout the week and only see locations a few times. The game needs the nerds everyone has been bashing about. Player skill is important in the game and that requires the knowledge part you were asking about. The most important factor of the game is that it remains fun. It is extremely difficult to add new cards and not create some overy powered ones. I understand it takes time to ensure balancing as much as possible but some of the others don't. The nerf is based on the feedback of the players. I would recommend adding more hero's and healing cards. I noticed that Braxton soldier is quite string for a 5cc maybe make him a 6cc. He can shut down many decks with just pure presence. Also I see you have priest hero's why not make a counter dark lore hero's set for them. I believe also that many people have been having issues with support so maybe that needs to be addressed. Maybe add a volunteer to help Aimee a one person team is difficult to run. Also maybe kyle should play randomly in the week and if you beat him a reward should be issued. Like 2 foils or some sc would be cool. The reward should never be the same. That would add some spicing in the game. Adjust the disconnects time issue as well I seen a bunch of people have issues where they had to wait 30 + minutes just to get a win after a dc.