Close

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 80
  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Croatia, GMT+1
    Posts
    190
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    I think weak cards are not a problem at all-they're an integral part of any card game. Weak heroes are a bit bigger problem but changing them could really mess things up.
    Npe cards could and should be dealt with -the question is whether to kill them with new cards or nerf/ban them.
    Vermin&soe nerf created a lot of new problems(vess, for example) because none of the new cards filled the void.
    Reaper is a tough one..i feel it is too powerful but i honestly think Zal would be basically unplayable without it. Mill prax too, but thats a good thing xD Making it 4cc could help.

  2. #22
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,050
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1

    Yes, Im brining it up... Allow buffs/nerfs for old cards!

    Quote Originally Posted by cargoth View Post
    I think weak cards are not a problem at all-they're an integral part of any card game. Weak heroes are a bit bigger problem but changing them could really mess things up.
    Npe cards could and should be dealt with -the question is whether to kill them with new cards or nerf/ban them.
    Vermin&soe nerf created a lot of new problems(vess, for example) because none of the new cards filled the void.
    Reaper is a tough one..i feel it is too powerful but i honestly think Zal would be basically unplayable without it. Mill prax too, but thats a good thing xD Making it 4cc could help.
    In the case of NPE-inducing cards (which we know can be problematic), I think we could trial some specific card bans in the player-run tournaments as a first step and then maybe a month-long ban in Rated Multiplayer. But it's also worth considering what impact an increase in the minimum deck size would have, since a move to 50-card is a very real possibility at some point.

    And it's also worth considering that 67 new cards are about to hit so changing any existing cards at this time would be too late or too soon.

    I wonder if Mango and Fristar would agree it's better to consider those approaches before simply changing old cards?

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Croatia, GMT+1
    Posts
    190
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    50 cards sounds interesting! I think it would be nice to give 3 max copies approach a try in a few tourneys as well-i truly have no idea how that would influence the game but it would definitely shake things up.
    I have seen some of the potetial NPE answers in the spoilers but it remains to be seen how much impact will they have. I love the stallvess killer location that hits rogues as well. However, unless I build a deck around its ability (haste allies probably) it will have no place in a normal sized deck.
    That might change if you raise the decksize to 50, but then again at least 3 of those 10 extra cards will probably be draw.
    Time will tell xD
    I do feel you guys are doing a great job and hope to see you experiment with drastic changes such as banning, decksize and even max copy count.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    137
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Gondorian View Post
    In the case of NPE-inducing cards (which we know can be problematic), I think we could trial some specific card bans in the player-run tournaments as a first step and then maybe a month-long ban in Rated Multiplayer. But it's also worth considering what impact an increase in the minimum deck size would have, since a move to 50-card is a very real possibility at some point.

    And it's also worth considering that 67 new cards are about to hit so changing any existing cards at this time would be too late or too soon.

    I wonder if Mango and Fristar would agree it's better to consider those approaches before simply changing old cards?
    The move to 50 card decks just makes luck factor increase a lot... The reason why SE has some edge over it's competitors is that it's more skill based as a game. 50 card decks and max 3 copies is what games like Elder Scrolls Legends do, and they do it better than era as they have a huge budget. Please stick to the edge that Era has - a great and deep game where luck is not as big a factor as it is in other games! The sac -> resource system is the best one invented for sure.

    If something is not broken, don't try to fix it. It just brings more problems. I think that the reason people suggest certain cards to be nerfed is that they make the game less enjoyable. I think that there is a big consensus that Soul Reaper is OP for example, and that decks that recycle it with Mimic and graveyard with Eternal Renewal are very annoying. This is seen as a clear problem, and the logical way to counter it would be to change the card/cards in question, and not change the whole game mechanics that work very well.

    A move to 50 cards would just make soul reaper/mimic combo better. Best Zal decks already run 45-46 cards, and millprax runs usually 60+. You see that the jump to 50 would destroy the consistency of the normal slim decks and only make these 2 (especially Zal with reaper) much better?

    Same goes for rain delay, into the forest, lay low. These cards can only and exclusively be used to play time and make your opponent not to be able to play his game - at a very low cost. Add shrine with LL and RD to make it even worse. I don't see why you couldn't just ban these cards? And if it's not possible to change SR just ban it and give Zal/Prax a new option that is more balanced than the current one.
    Last edited by Wimbled; 03-05-2018 at 11:48 PM.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    568
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Gondorian View Post
    In the case of NPE-inducing cards (which we know can be problematic), I think we could trial some specific card bans in the player-run tournaments as a first step and then maybe a month-long ban in Rated Multiplayer. But it's also worth considering what impact an increase in the minimum deck size would have, since a move to 50-card is a very real possibility at some point.

    And it's also worth considering that 67 new cards are about to hit so changing any existing cards at this time would be too late or too soon.

    I wonder if Mango and Fristar would agree it's better to consider those approaches before simply changing old cards?
    50 cards sounds like an,idea.
    However just ignoring older dead cards doesnt address them it just ignores it.
    I do not want to see any card bans, if a card is so bad it needs a ban then the board should just agree to buff nerf those specific cards at least.
    If ShadowEra plan is to become Magic The Gathering with power creep, banned cards, and can only be competitive with new cards the ShadowEra is on the right track. However I am not interested in playing a MTG knockoff. Ive been playing for a while cause I like the game, Innovation, and desire to improve the game.
    Not Im going to bury my head in the sand because I dont wanna do something that would improve the game.

    Example : Into the Forest. Most universally hated bs card. Easy fix would be Exhaust hero nd be hidden.

    Also do not lump fixing NPE cards and buff dead cards togethor. 2 seperate issues.

    Dead Card Wild Berserker. Make always have haste.
    If any buffs to older cards are to much then change slightly again. Dont remake the cards, just small easy buffs.

  6. #26
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,050
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Wimbled View Post
    The move to 50 card decks just makes luck factor increase a lot... The reason why SE has some edge over it's competitors is that it's more skill based as a game. 50 card decks and max 3 copies is what games like Elder Scrolls Legends do, and they do it better than era as they have a huge budget. Please stick to the edge that Era has - a great and deep game where luck is not as big a factor as it is in other games! The sac -> resource system is the best one invented for sure.

    If something is not broken, don't try to fix it. It just brings more problems. I think that the reason people suggest certain cards to be nerfed is that they make the game less enjoyable. I think that there is a big consensus that Soul Reaper is OP for example, and that decks that recycle it with Mimic and graveyard with Eternal Renewal are very annoying. This is seen as a clear problem, and the logical way to counter it would be to change the card/cards in question, and not change the whole game mechanics that work very well.

    Same goes for rain delay, into the forest, lay low. These cards can only and exclusively be used to play time and make your opponent not to be able to play his game - at a very low cost. Add shrine with LL and RD to make it even worse. I don't see why you couldn't just ban these cards? And if it's not possible to change SR just ban it and give Zal/Prax a new option that is more balanced than the current one.
    Thanks for opening a can of worms I can't resist tucking into. Yumbo!

    Luck and skill are not mutually exclusive. I would argue someone who can choose the right thing to do in more varied situations has more playing skill than one who requires totally consistent deck where they have limited choices and in fact relies on luck of the match up to compete rather than choose better selection of cards and play well with what they draw. The randomness of the deck is THE inherent luck of any card game that you want to preserve so games are capable of offering more varied situations to conquer. I'm sure some would like to choose order of all cards they draw but then they are playing the wrong type of game.

    Then there's deckbuilding skill where you could argue choosing the right extra cards to get up to 50 after adding the 4x staples takes more skill.

    And I don't know why size of budget is a factor in how another game can make 50 card with 3 copies work? Please don't take this as meaning that's what we want to do, but I'm confused by your comment.

    I didn't say we would increase deck size to tackle NPE but that if deck size changed for other good reasons then some problem cards might not be so problematic.

  7. #27
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,050
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Fristar View Post
    50
    Also do not lump fixing NPE cards and buff dead cards togethor. 2 seperate issues.
    The OP did that.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    137
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Gondorian View Post

    Luck and skill are not mutually exclusive. I would argue someone who can choose the right thing to do in more varied situations has more playing skill than one who requires totally consistent deck where they have limited choices and in fact relies on luck of the match up to compete rather than choose better selection of cards and play well with what they draw. The randomness of the deck is THE inherent luck of any card game that you want to preserve so games are capable of offering more varied situations to conquer. I'm sure some would like to choose order of all cards they draw but then they are playing the wrong type of game.

    Then there's deckbuilding skill where you could argue choosing the right extra cards to get up to 50 after adding the 4x staples takes more skill.

    And I don't know why size of budget is a factor in how another game can make 50 card with 3 copies work? Please don't take this as meaning that's what we want to do, but I'm confused by your comment.
    I just meant that IMO what makes Era special is the fact that you can make "slim" decks that are consistent. In the game I mentioned every game is different, it just means that you need more luck with fta/opening hand to be able to compete. One good hand -> one bad hand = gg. In era the games tend to be very close because this kind of factor doesn't have such a huge role. Ford was a very competitive MTG player and this kind of stuff made him leave the game for example -> losses that depend entirely on you drawing too bad a hand to be able to compete. In era these losses happen very seldom, and it's only a positive thing.

    Also you say that it's easy to play 40 card decks -> I can't disagree more. I've played Gwen for 3 months, finished top 5 in ladder every month and still my ability to play the "easy" 40 card deck is very far from perfect. If I manage to play a streak of 10 games with no wrong choices it's something very special. Same goes for tournaments. I always replay my losses and I can tell you that I'm very very very far from knowing how to play perfectly even only those 3-4 decks I know best. The situations change so much from game to game. And I'm one of the better players for sure. There's no player in the game who can play perfectly 30+ games in a row. Ever. That's how complicated a game this is. No need to bring in bigger decks, that will just increase the meaning of your starting hand and increase the luck factor. The importance of skill and the high difficulty level is what makes this game special. Look at the top players: Doctors with PhD, neuroscientists, ex-soldiers (who have an incredible concentration level) etc. Make luck a bigger factor and the game will only lose.

    The example of 50 card decks with 3x copies was just because some competitors have that, and the graphics, gameplay, campaigns etc are on a very different level compared to Era. Why would you like to take the fight to their territory? Why not concentrate on the strengths that era has and try to improve on it's weaknesses? The main weakness of the game are the NPE decks. Many people don't want to take part in these conversations anymore because they think that it's hopeless, and that no bans/changes on CotC/DP cards will ever be seen.
    Last edited by Wimbled; 03-06-2018 at 12:12 AM.

  9. #29
    Devoted Fan Gondorian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    England (GMT+0)
    Posts
    24,050
    Tournaments Joined
    1000
    Tournaments Won
    999
    Blog Entries
    1

    Yes, Im brining it up... Allow buffs/nerfs for old cards!

    Quote Originally Posted by Wimbled View Post
    I just meant that IMO what makes Era special is the fact that you can make "slim" decks that are consistent. In the game I mentioned every game is different, it just means that you need more luck with fta/opening hand to be able to compete. One good hand -> one bad hand = gg. In era the games tend to be very close because this kind of factor doesn't have such a huge role. Ford was a very competitive MTG player and this kind of stuff made him leave the game for example -> losses that depend entirely on you drawing too bad a hand to be able to compete. In era these losses happen very seldom, and it's only a positive thing.

    Also you say that it's easy to play 40 card decks -> I can't disagree more. I've played Gwen for 3 months, finished top 5 in ladder every month and still my ability to play the "easy" 40 card deck is very far from perfect. If I manage to play a streak of 10 games with no wrong choices it's something very special. Same goes to tournaments. I always replay my losses and I can tell you that I'm very very very far from knowing how to play perfectly even only those 3-4 decks I know best. The situations change so much from game to game. And I'm one of the better players for sure. There's no player in the game who can play perfectly 30+ games in a row. Ever. That's how complicated a game this is. No need to bring in bigger decks, that will just increase the meaning of your starting hand and increase the luck factor. The importance of skill and the high difficulty level is what makes this game special. Look at the top players: Doctors with PhD, neuroscientists, ex-soldiers (who have an incredible concentration level) etc. Make luck a bigger factor and the game will only lose.

    The example of 50 card decks with 3x copies was just because some competitors have that, and the graphics, gameplay, campaigns etc are on a very different level compared to Era. Why would you like to take the fight to their territory? Why not concentrate on the strengths that era has and try to improve on it's weaknesses? The main weakness of the game are the NPE decks. Many people don't want to take part in these conversations anymore because they think that it's hopeless, and that no bans/changes on CotC/DP cards will ever be seen.
    There's such a thing as being too consistent and it's why we went up from 30 to 40 cards back in 2011. Of all the things to love about SE, I would be rather sad if our 40-card 4-copy rule was even in the top ten of things that matter to people, especially when so many go above 40 and don't always put 4 copies of cards. Any other game can come along and copy that.

    As for changing CotC/DP and the "many people who don't want to take part in these conversations", if you could let them know that raising actual problems (instead of pitching "solutions") that could be discussed and understood (before we can all carefully consider how to tackle them) would be most appreciated.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    313
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Increasing deck size or decreasing copies of cards is a bad move imo. It will punish aggro decks far more than any other style and aggro is the natural enemy of heavy control npe styles. Would also kill many classes like mage that really need all the burn spells. Also warrior with only 3 bf sounds unplayable.
    IGN: TJ dubdub
    TG: @tjdubdub

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
  •