Close

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25
  1. #1
    Senior Member Veles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Serbia
    Posts
    4,241
    Tournaments Joined
    29
    Tournaments Won
    2

    Reevaluation of Ban List for Rated

    As you know, in version 3.60 a ban list for rated multiplayer was implemented. It currently includes:

    - Into the Forest
    - Lay Low
    - Soul Reaper
    - Armor of Ages
    - Crescendo

    Reason for that decision was that all cards in the list have been doing more harm than good by having negative impact on player experience. Choice for banning, instead of rebalancing right away was made mainly due to two reasons:
    1. To see what impact complete removal of cards will have on the meta.
    2. Business policy at that time was not to make changes to physical sets.

    You can read more about this here: http://www.shadowera.com/showthread....Rated-in-v3-60

    Now, with greater focus on digital product, time has come to revisit these cards. I think that, for the most part, their absence from the game had a positive impact. That is why we are not unbanning them in their original version, but we are considering changes that will address common complaints from players regarding negative experience they have when facing these cards in multiplayer.

    Do you think some of these cards have redeeming qualities worth saving or should we go for more drastic tweaks to them? Is there any other card from Call of the Crystals and Dark Prophecies sets you think has equally negative influence on game experience?
    Last edited by Veles; 03-21-2019 at 09:24 PM.

    Design Team Leader

    Check out this thread for some awesome articles and guides.

    “Let the future tell the truth, and evaluate each one according to his work and accomplishments. The present is theirs; the future, for which I have really worked, is mine”
    ― Nikola Tesla




  2. #2
    DP Visionary SET Colosal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Argentina GMT-3
    Posts
    6,582
    Tournaments Joined
    38
    Tournaments Won
    2
    From those cards the only one that could impact the meta (in a good way) is soul reaper cause now elemental class is a bit behind.

    I like a lot of possibilities suggested in the telegram chat from other players like adding a cap to the number of removed allies or just cutting the healing to 1hp per ally removed. Anything would be helpful and avoid the old problems related to this card.

    About the others, well I don't see them really needed right now, we'll see with next set is released.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    57
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    About Into the forest:
    The bad thing was that in Solo decks opp could hide and attack your hero and you couldn't do anything with it. This way it became an offensive card. To make it strictly defensive card I suggest to add something like that:
    ITF can be played if your hero haven't attacked this turn,
    While ITF is attached your hero can't attack.

    This way it could be used while you're low on health and need more time to prepare for board regain (you still can play items, allies and abilities).

    Wysłane z mojego Lenovo K53a48 przy użyciu Tapatalka

  4. #4
    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
    As I put on the other thread, I think you should limit changes to just these 5 cards, at this stage. It will be quick and simple to do and you won't get dragged into long discussion that could spiral out of control or risk altering more cards for more unknown and disruptive balance impact to a game that's actually in pretty great balance at the moment (when forthcoming other balance changes due in 3.66 are considered). If having a Ban List looks embarrassing for new players, then let's get it gone ASAP, at least for a bit, for when the new players from Waves marketing dollars show up.

    IF you really want to consider more changes at the same time, then maybe also update Moonstalker's shadow ability to have an extra sentence: "You can't activate this ability on your next turn." and put the cap back on Praxix damage. Both of these changes would also be in the same spirit of the original bans.

  5. #5
    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
    Do you have any specific changes to those 5 banned cards in mind?

    Maybe sharing them will help prompt more input.

    The question about changing any more than those 5 is both distraction and also goes beyond the need we are trying to achieve here: have no banned cards on Rated. The more you change, the higher the risk, the higher the cost, etc, etc.

  6. #6
    Senior Member starval's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States (GMT-4)
    Posts
    1,757
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Veles View Post
    As you know, in version 3.60 a ban list for rated multiplayer was implemented. It currently includes:

    - Into the Forest
    - Lay Low
    - Soul Reaper
    - Armor of Ages
    - Crescendo

    Reason for that decision was that all cards in the list have been doing more harm than good by having negative impact on player experience. Choice for banning, instead of rebalancing right away was made mainly due to two reasons:
    1. To see what impact complete removal of cards will have on the meta.
    2. Business policy at that time was not to make changes to physical sets.

    You can read more about this here: http://www.shadowera.com/showthread....Rated-in-v3-60

    Now, with greater focus on digital product, time has come to revisit these cards. I think that, for the most part, their absence from the game had a positive impact. That is why we are not unbanning them in their original version, but we are considering changes that will address common complaints from players regarding negative experience they have when facing these cards in multiplayer.

    Do you think some of these cards have redeeming qualities worth saving or should we go for more drastic tweaks to them? Is there any other card from Call of the Crystals and Dark Prophecies sets you think has equally negative influence on game experience?
    A few suggestions off the top of my head would be:

    Soul Reaper - 1hp per ally, down from 2hp per ally
    Lay Low - change to stealth instead of hidden (allows counterplay)
    Into the Forest - change to stealth instead of hidden (allows counterplay)
    Armor of Ages - change to Sustain: 1hp. 5 armor, 5 durability and your hero can't attack/defend. (still leaves it as a big armor but not as big and has a bit extra drawback)
    Crescendo - Increase cost to 7 from 6, Reduce durability from 6 to 5. (takes longer to put on field and a bit easier to deal with)
    IGN: TJ Starval
    TG: @Starval

    Elder, Mentoring Officer


    ShadowEra.Net Editor

  7. #7
    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 starval View Post
    A few suggestions off the top of my head would be:

    Soul Reaper - 1hp per ally, down from 2hp per ally
    Lay Low - change to stealth instead of hidden (allows counterplay)
    Into the Forest - change to stealth instead of hidden (allows counterplay)
    Armor of Ages - change to Sustain: 1hp. 5 armor, 5 durability and your hero can't attack/defend. (still leaves it as a big armor but not as big and has a bit extra drawback)
    Crescendo - Increase cost to 7 from 6, Reduce durability from 6 to 5. (takes longer to put on field and a bit easier to deal with)
    You almost read my mind, dude! Four of these would be simple surgical changes that should sufficiently remove the NPE-factor without radically changing them and get them off the Ban List ASAP to see the impact.

    Where we're not aligned would be AoA: I can't get behind slapping Sustain on a CotC card!

  8. #8
    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
    For those not following along on Telegram:

    Quote Originally Posted by NikVeles
    Here is where DT is standing right now with changes to banned cards:

    Soul Reaper

    Casting cost increased to 4 (from 3). Ability changed to "Remove all ally cards in your graveyard from the game. Your hero heals 1 damage for each card removed." (from "Remove all ally cards in your graveyard from the game. Your hero heals 2 damage for each card removed.")

    Armor of Ages

    Ability changed to "Your hero is disabled. When Armor of Ages is destroyed, your hero takes 6 damage." (from "Your hero can't attack or defend.")

    Crescendo

    Casting cost increased to 7 (from 6). Durability down to 4 (from 6).

    Into The Forest

    Ability changed to "Attach to target friendly ally until the start of your next turn. That ally has stealth." (from "Attach to your hero until the start of your next turn. Your hero is hidden (it and its attachments can't be targeted).")

    Lay Low

    Ability changed to "Duration 1. Friendly allies have ambush and stealth." (from "Your hero and allies can't attack and are hidden (they and their attachments can't be targeted) until the end of your next turn.")

    In additon to this we are considering changes to Rain Delay, Full Moon, Holy Shield and Voice of Winter in a way that will keep flavor of cards and their redeeming qualities, while removing NPE aspects.

  9. #9
    Junior Member Vanilla Twilight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    New South Wales, Australia.
    Posts
    1
    Tournaments Joined
    0
    Tournaments Won
    0
    Then id probably start with the number of turns 2 higher than the durability, and then possibly increasing the number of turns by 1. For higher values you would additionally reduce the defense by 1 and the turn by 1, so it doesn't absorb significantly more damage than the current iteration of the card.
    Last edited by Vanilla Twilight; 03-23-2019 at 11:18 PM.

  10. #10
    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 Vanilla Twilight View Post
    I don't see a reason to increase Soul Reapers Casting Cost, and would much prefer to give Crescendo 7 durability and trigger at 6 defense, giving you another full turn to remove it or kill the opponent.
    If you increase the durability, then you just make it harder to wear down before it explodes AND you increase its capacity to soak up damage. Are you trying to boost the NPE-factor?

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
  •