We have just released a v3.55 on the Test Server with balance changes and bug fixes and we have also imposed a Ban List in preparation for using it on Rated Multiplayer when v3.60 is out.
(I'm sorry but we can't delve into the reasons for the balance changes and Ban List here in this update but we will put something together in due course.)
In terms of live release date, all is on track for releasing v3.60 by the end of the month, with the final coding being completed March 25th, so that builds can be done on March 26th and then sent for approval by Google/Apple.
Huge thanks to the players who have been helping with the testing and giving their feedback.
If you want to get involved in the playtesting for the remaining two weeks of March, please PM me here or contact me on Telegram (@Gondorian), with your in-game name and including your Apple ID email or Google Account email if you want iOS/Android access, respectively.
CARD CHANGES COMPARED TO v3.54
- 15 card changes in LLP2
- 1 card change in LLP1
- 5 card changes in SF
- 2 card changes in Campaign.
All the changes can be seen here: www.shadowera.com/cards/3.55
BAN LIST IN 3.55 (and to be used in 3.60)
The following cards are banned in Rated Multiplayer (still legal in Unrated, single-player and Meltdown):
- Into the Forest
- Lay Low
- Soul Reaper
- Armor of Ages
- Crescendo
None of these cards are banned for OP reasons, it's because they do not fit with our vision for the game that is meant to be enjoyable first and foremost. We would never design these cards now, so why keep them if they are harming the game? Having cards like this just enables the type of play style that the vast majority of people dislike facing - so much they will leave our game and go do something else instead!
I know other cards have been suggested to be banned (e.g. Rain Delay), but we can see redeeming qualities in them that make them worth keeping. These five do more harm than good, in our opinion, and now we will try an experimental period with them gone (when 3.60 releases with LLP2 cards) to see if this assertion (that we are better off without them) is true.
The next step after that, if the assertion is true, would be to decide whether to make the ban permanent and what things to do to compensate our players for taking away five cards from Rated Multiplayer. (Maybe we will decide actually we will change them, but I doubt that because it's such a high cost thing to do and would change them in all formats when they are fine in single-player campaign and sealed formats like Meltdown.)
Bookmarks