All times are UTC + 1 hour

It is currently February 26th, 2020, 13:53

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: About Wild and Development Direction
PostPosted: April 19th, 2015, 20:14 

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013
Posts: 114
In-game name: RedNNet
This is pretty speculative, so you can put an "I think" in front of everything I say here.

You probably don't want to read the rest. There's a rough summary thing below. The most important point is that there isn't a simple, elegant, and fun solution to encourage cross-resource play, and the devs should focus on linking groups of scrolls rather than linking entire factions.

Cross-resource decks need to be viable, but right now only some styles are viable. The only real reason to go with a multi-resource deck is for combos, and while I love combos, decks which rely heavily on combos tend to be annoying to play or play against, and need a lot of draw or a lot of redundancy to work.

I don't think there is a simple and elegant solution to this problem. The devs could build around wild and expand it. But that would be difficult to balance and it would place constraints on new scrolls, and older scrolls would be used less. Instead of increasing deck diversity, encouraging multi-resource play could decrease deck diversity.

The devs tend to add new mechanics rather than adding bridges between mechanics or expanding mechanics. For example, scrolls which interact with lingering spells usually don't interact with other mechanics except the most basic ones like resources and creature type. You can't build a growth deck around both lingering spells and enchantments or around enchantments and creature spam. If the devs start building around wild, the same pattern would probably hold and deck diversity would stay the same.

Wild doesn't link many mechanics/playstyles, and if it did it would be OP.

Instead, I think the devs should add "bridges". Instead of looking for one mechanic to let players mash factions together, they should look for mechanics which link each playstyle, whether between factions or between subgroups of factions. This is better than adding entirely new mechanics because it keeps older scrolls viable and expands on old mechanics rather than replacing them with more powerful mechanics.

To summarize that ramble:
1. Cross resource decks need to be viable, to increase deck diversity.
2. Wild only encourages cross-resource play for combos. There's no reason to use plain creatures except as filler or to round out decks.
3. Decks which rely on combos so much aren't fun to play against.
4. The devs shouldn't look for a simple, elegant and fun way to encourage cross-resource play, because there isn't one.
5. Expanding wild requires a lot of balancing and changes to existing scrolls, often making them weak just so they aren't OP in one combo.
6. The devs tend to add new playstyles rather than expanding on old ones, so they either replace the old playstyles or aren't played.
7. Greater numbers of viable playstyles/mechanics --> more ways to mix playstyles/mechanics --> less repetitive gameplay and more fun tinkering and experimenting.
8. If wild linked more mechanics/playstyles, it would be OP.
9. Instead, the devs should build "bridges" between playstyles/mechanics. For example, they could find ways to link gravelocks and growth without explicit combos like gravehawk. A deck which plays both without relying on specific combos should be viable.
10. Wild just links scrolls in different resources. There aren't enough links between sub-factions. For example, there are few knight-soldier decks or beast-enchantment decks or undead-curse decks.

Example Scrolls
These scrolls should fit these constraints:
1. Connect groups of scrolls which are largely separated, such as gravelocks and structures or aggro growth and undead.
2. Increase deck diversity (not replace other playstyles and not create any single scroll-single scroll combos).
3. Not require lots of draw or redundancy.
4. Not all be the same.
5. Be fun to play with and against.
6. Mostly provide ways to play multiple sub-factions together, rather than providing combos between sub-factions.

For this example, I'm going to focus on linking energy control (structures and destruction spells) with aggro growth.

Barbarian 4 :growth
When Barbarian destroys an enemy unit, it continues its attack with an additional 2 attack.
Explanation: A lot of energy spells do 1 or 2 damage. This scroll takes advantage of that fact. Its low health sort of combos with walls as well.

Kinfolk Pillager 2 :growth
*Idol strike 2
Pillage: Draw a structure.
Explanation: Energy control decks don't have many ways to destroy idols, and this helps fill this gap. It also draws a structure, so it can replace hired smuggler or augment structure draw. Its low health sort of combos with walls.

Monument 1 :energy
When a unit you control deals 3 or more damage to an idol, Monument gains 1 health.
Explanation: Get an early start with aggro, and build up for control.
  Profile Send private message  
 Post subject: Re: About Wild and Development Direction
PostPosted: April 21st, 2015, 03:59 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013
Posts: 114
In-game name: clamlol
I agree with just about everything you posted here. The only problem is that not enough existing scrolls bridge subtype and faction barriers, so the current type of decks (monoresource and multiresource combo) would most likely continue to be the most popular ones unless an addition of at least 100 "bridge scrolls" is made.

Spoiler: [show]

  Profile Send private message  
 Post subject: Re: About Wild and Development Direction
PostPosted: June 29th, 2015, 06:39 

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2013
Posts: 114
In-game name: RedNNet
Ronneyjk wrote:
I have not seen much about this.

I pretty much disagree with everything I wrote in this now.
  Profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 1 hour

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to: