Mulligan!!! SHADOW ERA NEEDS IT!

[RavingLunatic]

I voted "no mulligan". Most decks still use only 39 drawable cards (40 w/hero). If deck sizes were to be upped then maybe it would be okay. I personally enjoy the strategy part that this game offers by having to sac your own cards or not and not having mulligans.

[frost09]

what's the use some cards have this feature and they are cheap for example change of plans and word of the prophet which are cheap casts so I do not see a use for it

[FDL]

I've always been opposed to mulligans in SE: the game is consistent enough as it is with its small decks, big starting hand, universal resources and hero powers.

I'm not sure that the decks mulligans would help are the decks we want to see more of in the game. IMO, Bad Santa decks (i.e. decks that don't really care about what their opponent is doing) stand to benefit the most from any form of mulligan. If hosers (i.e. cards that really punish a certain strategy) become more prominent, they'd also benefit.

IMO, the number of non-games caused by unplayable starting hands is low enough that it's not worth risking creating more non-games by enabling Bad Santa decks and allowing players to make crappy mulligan decisions (I would bet that mulliganing with a card penalty would be a bad decision 99% of the time for any decently built ally-focused deck).

[Spieler]

With Muligan are turn6 kills every turn possible & Bad Santa becomes OP > Rush/Aggro Decks are pushed > Limited Deck diversity = less fun & more unbalanced.

So please not.

[meeklosh]

I'd say let's give it a try and then jugde. Just to imagine things like what could happen if bla bla and so on doesnt do anything. Mulligan doesn't assure you better cards/hand, you just redraw your starting hand again, so there is also a possibility that it can be even worse, but at least you had the option and decided so, thats the risk. It can benefit aggro decks, sure, but at the same time it gives the opportunity to the opposing player to get something for defending against rush and be prepared.

[SeceriaSkye]

Its not a surprise that many people instantly think of Bad Santa and its interactions with a -1 mulligan. I, for one, would be pleased to take the mulligan -1 going first if I had 4x Bad Santa in my deck and I opened with a less-than-optimal hand.

Dont overlook other ways that we can incorporate a mulligan penalty. Maybe grant the opposing hero more shadow energy or start the opponent with 1 extra resource, which I think is a neat idea because it draws on shadow era's unique game mechanics.

My vote is: Lets give it a try. Initially making it an option in unrated games isnt a bad idea and may be extremely helpful for players to test their decks, because now they can when they want their opponent to have a strong start, or maybe mulligan so that they can try playing with a bad hand. Infinite mulligan in unrated could even turn out to be a useful feature for players to test 'what if' scenarios and opening draws (but I digress).

[danae]

I voted no mulligan but I wouldn't be opposed to have this as an option in custom games so it can be used in tournaments if wanted.

[Areliae]

OK, I strongly believe mulligans would be bad for SE. This isn't because of one particular deck type dominating the meta, but because it makes deck building simpler. I don't WANT to be able search for the cards that counter whatever my opponent has. I WANT to have to balance my deck, and choose how many counter cards are too many. If want to put Groundshift in my deck because of Moonstalker, I want to have to decide if I'm over-committing on it. If I put 4 in my deck, and draw all 4, that's on me, and I need to tweak my deck.

I also think this will let decks get away with only one plan more than they already do. If a deck commits fully to a rush, and doesn't pull the key cards it needs, that's on the deck. Once again, I want to have to plan for a bad start. I want to figure out ways to come back, put in cards that are strong from behind, and find ways around bad RNG. You have to adapt, form a new plan on the fly, and think your way out of unexpected situations.

There is this idea some people have that more consistency is always good. If that was the case, we would be able to order our decks ourselves. Part of the fun of a CCG is having to maximize your chance to win, despite the uncertainty. Will you be screwed sometimes? Of course. If you hate the fact that, very rarely, you just get utterly destroyed by the luck of the draw, then I'd recommend picking up GO or Chess (both wonderful games), but not a CCG. If you find yourself getting very unlucky all or most of the time, I have to tell you, your deck is not as balanced as it could be. I don't want the game to accommodate lazy thinking, and I want to be rewarded for having a backup plan.

You want to mitigate some of the RNG, but sacrifice does that. Mulligan is used in MTG because of land, and in HS because you only get 3-4 cards. Shadow era needs none of that.

EDIT: I just want to throw out some percentages for fun, I also want to state that I don't think any mulligan penalty (e.g. -1 card) invalidates any of the above points. If you wish to challenge that assertion, I will provide my arguments at a later date. These are just some of the chances to draw cards (for fun):

39 card deck (40-hero)

Drawing one of four cards in your first:

7 cards=56.28%
10 cards=71.12%
15 cards=87.08%

Drawing one of eight cards (two different three drops) in your first:

7 cards=82.90%
10 cards=93.02%
15 cards=98.80%

Drawing one of two cards in your first:

7 cards=33.06%
10 cards=45.21%
15 cards=62.75%

I used an online calculator for that, and while I could calculate the odds of drawing 3+ of the same card in your starting hand, I will avoid that work and simply say it isn't likely enough in my opinion to warrant a mulligan system.

P.S. Also edited for grammar.

[BT InzektrHornet]

OK, I strongly believe mulligans would be bad for SE. This isn't because of one particular deck type dominating the meta, but because it makes deck building simpler. I don't WANT to be able search for the cards that counter whatever my opponent has. I WANT to have to balance my deck, and choose how many counter cards are too many. If want to put Groundshift in my deck because of Moonstalker, I want to have to decide if I'm over-committing on it. If I put 4 in my deck, and draw all 4, that's on me, and I need to tweak my deck.

I also think this will let decks get away with only one plan more than they already do. If a deck commits fully to a rush, and doesn't pull the key cards it needs, that's on the deck. Once again, I want to have to plan for a bad start. I want to figure out ways to come back, put in cards that are strong from behind, and find ways around bad RNG. You have to adapt, form a new plan on the fly, and think your way out of unexpected situations.

There is this idea some people have that more consistency is always good. If that was the case, we would be able to order our decks ourselves. Part of the fun of a CCG is having to maximize your chance to win, despite the uncertainty. Will you be screwed sometimes? Of course. If you hate the fact that, very rarely, you just get utterly destroyed by the luck of the draw, then I'd recommend picking up GO or Chess (both wonderful games), but not a CCG. If you find yourself getting very unlucky all or most of the time, I have to tell you, your deck is not as balanced as it could be. I don't want the game to accommodate lazy thinking, and I want to be rewarded for having a backup plan.

You want to mitigate some of the RNG, but sacrifice does that. Mulligan is used in MTG because of land, and in HS because you only get 3-4 cards. Shadow era needs none of that.

EDIT: I just want to throw out some percentages for fun, I also want to state that I don't think any mulligan penalty (e.g. -1 card) invalidates any of the above points. If you wish to challenge that assertion, I will provide my arguments at a later date. These are just some of the chances to draw cards (for fun):

39 card deck (40-hero)

Drawing one of four cards in your first:

7 cards=56.28%
10 cards=71.12%
15 cards=87.08%

Drawing one of eight cards (two different three drops) in your first:

7 cards=82.90%
10 cards=93.02%
15 cards=98.80%

Drawing one of two cards in your first:

7 cards=33.06%
10 cards=45.21%
15 cards=62.75%

I used an online calculator for that, and while I could calculate the odds of drawing 3+ of the same card in your starting hand, I will avoid that work and simply say it isn't likely enough in my opinion to warrant a mulligan system.

P.S. Also edited for grammar.

Shadow era has mulligans in custom games now. Go use it so wulven can see the data!

[deathintheflesh]

.it wont let me vote.
Im anitmulligan