Close

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 67
  1. #21
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,028
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Kolodi View Post
    Stall is annoying. Let's bring together some ideas about how to limit it.
    A good place to start is clear explanation of what you mean by "stall". I think Veles posted a good one in the past.

  2. #22
    Senior Member jacelkos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    France (GMT+1)
    Posts
    170
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Gondorian View Post
    A good place to start is clear explanation of what you mean by "stall". I think Veles posted a good one in the past.
    Stall decks are the main issue, but I think people mostly think about "Negative Player Experience".

    That's what happens when a game is not only uninteresting, but brings you such a negative experience that you actually regret having played it. Playing a few games like this over a short period of time makes you want to quit SE, or at least take a break like I'm doing currently.

    In my opinion, this happens mainly when the other player plays a deck you can't interact with. And this is amplified when the game lasts for a long time.

    Indeed, technically speaking, the description above applies to rush mages. They play a death race game that relies on an ally rush (Kris, Puwen, Priest, Aldon) on the early turns, then Nova the field and burn. You can't really interact with them, and if they have a good opening you're dead most of the time unless you play a deck that's good against rush.
    However, the game is fairly quick, which reduces the NPE. And they need a good starting hand, or they are easily beaten by mid-range decks, which makes them less consistent.

    Stall decks are the opposite end of the spectrum. You can't interact with them either, and games against them take forever (Moonstalker mill decks, stall Vess, stall Prax, stall Skervox).
    As Sisyphos once said after a WCQ, "Millstalker is just a really long way of saying that you forgot to tech against it".
    They are viable in some meta (like nowadays), prey on decks without many idem destruction cards, and are the most NPE of all.

    Intermediary NPE decks exist, such as ITF gwen or Lay Low Lance. You can't interact with them, and although they are unpleasant to play against it's not an excruciatingly long game.

    Of course, all these decks can be beaten with the right counter decks and / or tech cards.
    But simply playing against them is a NPE, which is the reason why they need to go away in my opinion.

    Another way of saying this, and the way I see it, is that players playing NPE decks in general, and stall in particular, are selfish persons that simply care about enjoying themselves, possibly by making the other person's experience a bad one.

    However, this game is played by two persons, and both of them need to enjoy it to make it viable.
    Member of Supreme Legion

    We are legion, For we are many
    IGN: SL Jacelkos

  3. #23
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,028
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by jacelkos View Post
    Stall decks are the main issue, but I think people mostly think about "Negative Player Experience".

    That's what happens when a game is not only uninteresting, but brings you such a negative experience that you actually regret having played it. Playing a few games like this over a short period of time makes you want to quit SE, or at least take a break like I'm doing currently.

    In my opinion, this happens mainly when the other player plays a deck you can't interact with. And this is amplified when the game lasts for a long time.

    Indeed, technically speaking, the description above applies to rush mages. They play a death race game that relies on an ally rush (Kris, Puwen, Priest, Aldon) on the early turns, then Nova the field and burn. You can't really interact with them, and if they have a good opening you're dead most of the time unless you play a deck that's good against rush.
    However, the game is fairly quick, which reduces the NPE. And they need a good starting hand, or they are easily beaten by mid-range decks, which makes them less consistent.

    Stall decks are the opposite end of the spectrum. You can't interact with them either, and games against them take forever (Moonstalker mill decks, stall Vess, stall Prax, stall Skervox).
    As Sisyphos once said after a WCQ, "Millstalker is just a really long way of saying that you forgot to tech against it".
    They are viable in some meta (like nowadays), prey on decks without many idem destruction cards, and are the most NPE of all.

    Intermediary NPE decks exist, such as ITF gwen or Lay Low Lance. You can't interact with them, and although they are unpleasant to play against it's not an excruciatingly long game.

    Of course, all these decks can be beaten with the right counter decks and / or tech cards.
    But simply playing against them is a NPE, which is the reason why they need to go away in my opinion.

    Another way of saying this, and the way I see it, is that players playing NPE decks in general, and stall in particular, are selfish persons that simply care about enjoying themselves, possibly by making the other person's experience a bad one.

    However, this game is played by two persons, and both of them need to enjoy it to make it viable.
    Well, there's two camps, with some overlap.

    There's the players who like that style regardless of how much it wins. I think you are mostly referring to them above.

    Then there are players who will use this style if they think it is their best way of winning. It sounds like maybe this style is getting more competitive than we'd like, but I'd need to pull some detailed stats to track that. The World Championships is another good time to see how viable the "stall" style is.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    569
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by EdgeAce View Post
    This seems like a great idea, and as for the Vess stall decks, I don't think that will be an issue. Vess right now is a big control jocky that takes time and then sweeps the board late game in my experience, but not so late as to be counted as stall, because he does need to build a board state. Just because an archetype is available is not quite enough to warrant worrying about it. I doubt Vess stall will see to much competitive play unless I have missed something big here.
    Stall Vess isnt a thing cause its countered by the BS cards like A Legend Rises, ele ignore attatchments etc. Its pretty balanced to be honest. Im a extreme controll vess player whos allies kill you in the end.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    569
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Demnchi View Post
    NOTE: I do not do any design work on the cards or their balance. Do NOT take this post as a glimpse into future changes or anything. This is simply my personal opinion as a player who plays this game, like the rest of you.

    To me the issue with stall decks has little to do with balance and more to do with the experience of normal matchmaking. It's simply frustrating to go up against a deck that's sole idea of "winning" is to make you wait by preventing your actions from mattering for several turns in a row. To me, the main difference between a stall deck and control deck is that a control deck has an actual win condition they are building up to. Stall doesn't. There is no card to stop or tech for that would let them win, you simply have to find a way to not lose by simply waiting (I've faced plenty of stall decks where my strategy became having a full hand, and passing the turn).

    Stall decks I've personally seen:

    Moonstaller/Millstalker: The original. You basically use Moonstalker's ability/Full Moon to prevent your opponent from dealing damage to your hero, thus allowing your Evil Ascendant and Lone Wolf to trigger with you in relative safety. You do this hoping you can eventually remove all the options your opponent has. Beyond the cards mentioned above, you also have Now You're Mine and Captured Prey for them to control the board long enough to get to this point. What Big Teeth is usually used to speed this process up since it never breaks. . It is typically beaten by waiting for that one opening and dealing all your damage then, or creating that opening yourself by destroying Full Moon or removing Moonstalker's stealth.

    I've actually spent a great deal of time trying to process what purpose Moonstalker's ability has besides stalling. The real answer is that it's supposed to be used to protect your allies to allow them a greater chance of sticking on the board or helping you secure a win. If it didn't stealth the hero, however, then you would give your opponent every excuse to rush you down. The main issue with this is it allows you to turn cards that are supposed to buy you a turn to set up a win condition into cards that just buy you a turn. It never grows towards a real win condition and there is nothing stopping them from doing that imo.

    My personal suggestion: Moonstalker's ability is changed to "3SE: While you control an ally, Moonstalker and all friendly allies have Stealth until the start of your next turn. If you don't control an ally, Moonstalker heals 3 damage."

    Basically, this would force them to run allies to make use of the stealth, which would leave less resources for the stall cards to be used in such a manner. It also gives opposing players a way to remove stealth from Moonstalker if they are capable of removing all of his allies. Since we've taken away the main way Moonstalker pervent's damage, I felt the healing clause for not having an ally would be helpful, but not cause him to simply waste time.


    ---

    Stallvox: This deck makes use of Skervox's ability to ensure that opposing allies are disabled and/or killed before they can act. It's goal is the same as the previous deck. Make sure your opponent runs out of options by making them waste turns as they attempt to play allies to defeat you. Typically, this deck can be defeated by focusing less on allies and more on ability damage or attacking with hero weapons. The other way to defeat it is to overwhelm it with high-health allies to force them through their Perfect Shots.

    I've shared this opinion on my streams and on the forums many times in the past. Skervox's ability is the real culprit imo. Disabling every single ally on the opposing side basically removes your opponet's board for a whole turn (in most cases). Most abilities can't be utilized and the allies will simply take 2 damage (4 if Evil Ascendant is in play) before they are able to retaliate. Meanwhile, anything that can survive that will be controlled down by hunter's powerful control cards that work VERY well with Skervox's Poison. If it didn't disable allies, they would only take 1 damage (2 if Evil Ascendant is in play) before they are able to be used. Even if that only gives them a single attack, it makes a world of difference when it comes to ensuring the game can be pushed forward.

    I don't think that this means Skervox's ability is over powered, I just think it leads to a very frustrating situation for the opposing player.

    My Personal Suggestion: Skervox's ability is changed to "4SE: All opposing allies are poisoned and target opposing ally is disabled...." He may need some sort of boost to maintain balance, but the basic premise is that he can't nuke boards so easily on his own with no drawback what so ever and give the opponent something to work with if they play well against Skervox's poison. This is especially true once cards like Krugal Butcher hit the scene, making it even more beneficial to poison allies as a hunter.



    ---

    I could breakdown a few more, but it's getting late and this is taking me much longer to write than I thought. x.x One thing I will mention is that I don't see Lay Low Lance as a stall deck, I see it as a combo deck. Sure there are a lot of stall element's in it, but it has a clear plan and one that you can disrupt if it's in the meta.

    To me these changes would be better than banning cards or reverting Vermin/Sorcerer. That being said, I don't think changing Vermin/Sorcerer to be more effective than they are now to be a bad thing. The main issue before is that they we're too easy to trigger and became an insane tempo swing when they did. They counted and targeted both items and abilities without prejudice. They basically needed to be reined in, not destroyed. There have been a lot of suggestions but personally I vote for them acting similar to Artful Squire. My personal suggestions:

    Vermin: "When Rapacious Vermin is summoned while an opposing player controls at least 3 items and/or abilities, target item or ability controlled by that player may be destroyed. If you do, Rapacious Vermin is Exiled."

    Sorcerer: When Sorcerer of Endia is summoned while an opposing player controls at least 3 items and/or abilities, target item or ability controlled by that player may be destroyed. If you do, Sourcer of Endia is Exiled."

    Exile prevents them from being recursed and prevents them from being a a good body that already got you a 1 for 1 trade at the least. It also opens up a bit of trickery where you could provide them steadfast (such as Stand Firm or Assumed Command) to allow them to stick to the board anyways. Vermin could also cost 3 when he destroys something, but I'd rather take it one step at a time.

    Another great suggestion would be to revert them, except they don't count and/or can't destroy attachments (as mentioned in this very thread). It was the main reason they were able to trigger so easily after all. A Crippling Blow and a Blood Frenzy and suddenly that Warrior can't play the weapon their deck was built around.... or any of them is destroyed.

    Yet another direction would be to limit the cost of things they could destroy (my suggestion would be 4 cost or less), thus preventing them from easily taking down High cost weapons and armor for a mesely 2 resources.
    ---

    Anyways, I do think stall is a real issue that needs to be tackled. It's just a matter of figuring out how to do that, without making too big of a splash elsewhere.

    As a Member of the Board and the Community Manager: I am listening to feedback, please keep giving it and discussing what is important to you.
    Absolutely love most of these ideas Dem.
    Itll create more fun play.
    I vote for most of these changes.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    569
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Gondorian View Post
    Well, there's two camps, with some overlap.

    There's the players who like that style regardless of how much it wins. I think you are mostly referring to them above.

    Then there are players who will use this style if they think it is their best way of winning. It sounds like maybe this style is getting more competitive than we'd like, but I'd need to pull some detailed stats to track that. The World Championships is another good time to see how viable the "stall" style is.
    The world championship is not a good example of whether people enjoy playing vs stall or not, i personally would just prefer to forfeit everygame that i see my opponent having 80 cards. Just big waste of time.

  7. #27
    Chat Mod Kip thorp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North east USA gmt -4
    Posts
    4,128
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Ahh, the good ole days, when a 40-50 minute game vs Millstalker was the biggest worry.
    A1 kip thorp
    the daddy daughter team of death
    Proud Graduate of Kiptergarten
    A1-Alliance ~ Evolution in Theory

    A1 Alliance LEADER & Crash Test Dummy
    Check out our recruitment thread

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    245
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by AmberFade View Post
    Just revert the SoE/Vermin nerfs that will solve the issue (maybe excluding attachments). They have been a decent tool to limit NPE in quickmatch before and their nerfs were bullshit peddaled by people who have no idea about balance.
    Seconded. Revert to previous state.

  9. #29
    Senior Member jacelkos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    France (GMT+1)
    Posts
    170
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Gondorian View Post
    Well, there's two camps, with some overlap.

    There's the players who like that style regardless of how much it wins. I think you are mostly referring to them above.

    Then there are players who will use this style if they think it is their best way of winning. It sounds like maybe this style is getting more competitive than we'd like, but I'd need to pull some detailed stats to track that. The World Championships is another good time to see how viable the "stall" style is.
    I'm not sure I understand your point.

    Are you saying that NPE decks should exist because some people enjoy playing them?
    Then what about the other person having to suffer the negative experience on the other side?

    Or are you saying that they should exist because they are not competitive?
    In that case I don't see how this reduces the NPE either. Are you assuming they won't be as popular, and therefore not such an issue in that case? That's a thin line to walk on, and you can't be sure that a new broken stall deck will not kill the meta for a few weeks.
    Member of Supreme Legion

    We are legion, For we are many
    IGN: SL Jacelkos

  10. #30
    Senior Member Spartan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    162
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jacelkos View Post
    Stall decks are the main issue, but I think people mostly think about "Negative Player Experience".

    That's what happens when a game is not only uninteresting, but brings you such a negative experience that you actually regret having played it. Playing a few games like this over a short period of time makes you want to quit SE, or at least take a break like I'm doing currently.

    In my opinion, this happens mainly when the other player plays a deck you can't interact with. And this is amplified when the game lasts for a long time.

    Indeed, technically speaking, the description above applies to rush mages. They play a death race game that relies on an ally rush (Kris, Puwen, Priest, Aldon) on the early turns, then Nova the field and burn. You can't really interact with them, and if they have a good opening you're dead most of the time unless you play a deck that's good against rush.
    However, the game is fairly quick, which reduces the NPE. And they need a good starting hand, or they are easily beaten by mid-range decks, which makes them less consistent.

    Stall decks are the opposite end of the spectrum. You can't interact with them either, and games against them take forever (Moonstalker mill decks, stall Vess, stall Prax, stall Skervox).
    As Sisyphos once said after a WCQ, "Millstalker is just a really long way of saying that you forgot to tech against it".
    They are viable in some meta (like nowadays), prey on decks without many idem destruction cards, and are the most NPE of all.

    Intermediary NPE decks exist, such as ITF gwen or Lay Low Lance. You can't interact with them, and although they are unpleasant to play against it's not an excruciatingly long game.

    Of course, all these decks can be beaten with the right counter decks and / or tech cards.
    But simply playing against them is a NPE, which is the reason why they need to go away in my opinion.

    Another way of saying this, and the way I see it, is that players playing NPE decks in general, and stall in particular, are selfish persons that simply care about enjoying themselves, possibly by making the other person's experience a bad one.

    However, this game is played by two persons, and both of them need to enjoy it to make it viable.

    Thank you!
    Member of A1 family

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
  •