Banning luck from the matches


#1

I am one of those who feel that luck plays too big a role in this game:

  • Lucky drops can make you lose a game easily
  • Devour % is even worse
  • Death mark similar
  • Poison

The lucky drops was addressed with the combo breaker but this is now turned off in higher PVP ranks. I would rather see an increase in stats instead.

A 20% devour could become: at the 4th cast will devour someone (100%) and you could also change the number of cast depending on difficulty

Deathmark should also not randomly kill, but maybe to be deathmarked a second time would kill off the unit.

Poison ticking every second turn would be my preference.

What do you think? We could extend the same for traitstone dropping: every 100 (or 200) victories you get a legendary


#2

Devour % is fine when it comes to humans. But when it comes to CPU it seems that devour and agile as well is more than the procentages that it says.


#3

I’m ok with the way it is. But I recognise we have different tastes.


#4

Randomness makes game exciting.
What you are proposing is to make the game dull and predictable.


#5

It can be a bit outrageous at time, but as a whole, I don’t have a problem with the role of luck right now since losses don’t really cost you anything. For me, it keeps the game interesting as no matter how good my team is, there is a chance that something goes terribly wrong, and it also gives me a chance to win even when my team is outclassed by a huge margin.

I mean, you do have the advantage anyway because you go first and the AI is kind of dumb, but that is not something that really needs to be changed either in my opinion. If PvP was “live” (as in both players playing simultaneously against each other), this would be an issue since it’d be very frustrating, but as I am playing against the computer I don’t really care.


#6

Maybe what you really asking for is that you wants to have the combo breaker off. So enemy team doesnt get lucky drops the way they do today. That might come in the upcomming patch. A reduce in the status effects would’nt be the answer here, they are quite balanced if you ask me, and have never been better.


#7

Yeah often had that feeling, especially for agile

I don’t agree (but everyone’s their opinion). I enjoy more the strategy part of setting up a team and then planning the moves. Luck will always play a role but a lesser one.


#8

May I ask what team(s) you are running?


#9

Got quite a few and tend to change often, but at the moment shegra, black shackles, valkyrie and giant spider. And hydra + 3 x devil dervish (don’t know their english name) for challenges .


#10

I’m okay with general luck thing. What I really hate is boards with single picks.

If we had some limited mulligan option (say 1 free board shuffle per 5 pvp games that stacks up to a handful or baing a random spoil drop like TS) that would remove some grief.

It could even be restockable spending diamonds and/or better rate for VIP so might align with actual development goals.


#11

Buahahaha, you just won an award for the joke of the day in my opinion :laughing:
Seriously, it’s like stating that Mt. Everest is kind of high :wink:


#12

Personally, I prefer playing Chess to Slot Machines, so anything reducing the impact of luck spikes is fine with me.

Devour has a high chance of being entirely useless and a low chance of being insanely overpowered. Speaking Arena, if it hits, the game might as well go directly to the victory (or defeat) screen.

Change Devour to trigger every time, limit it by what can be devoured. You shouldn’t be able to swallow anything larger than you are, so Health might be a good limitation. A 50% Devour would swallow anything that has at most 50% of your health (Sand Shark level), a 100% Devour would swallow anything that has at most 100% of your health (Kerberos level). Great Maw should probably be able to devour anything. Allows players to prevent Devour by keeping the health of the devouring troop below critical thresholds.

It’s still pretty wonky. Would make a single Deathmark unit next to useless, a full Deathmark team quite overpowered. Maybe change the status effect so that skull damage hits all deathmarked troops in addition to what it would normally hit? A deathmarked troop in first position would get hit twice (standard damage plus deathmarked damage). Simple enough for the AI to not mess up too much.

Somewhat nasty for Arena, sounds reasonable though.


#13

not bad. :slight_smile:


#14

My problem with that is that sometimes the AI lucky drops means a team wipeout or leaving you in such a bad position that the game is lost. Honestly, that’s not very fun. Might as well, randomly insert a lost match in your winning streak.

Poison is actually ticking with a 50% rate, I just feel sometimes (esp. in Arena) it ticks all turns for me and never for the AI. It’s just perception but still :slight_smile:
What’s overpowered in Arena is burning. 3 dmg per tick is very hard on such low life creatures. But that’s another topic!


#15

The problem with changing stats instead of luck is that builds exist that work better against higher stats. These include things like Great Maw and Bone Dragon.


#16

If it’s just “sometimes”, it doesn’t sound too bad. And it works in your favor; I had a game where I got 4 different skull matches in a row from drops, enabling me to wipe out the first three troops of the AI team (two of which were charged up and ready to wreak havoc on me).


#17

I’m not on PC/Mobile (PS4 here), but I was thinking that a double gem screen “window”, one above the other, would allow lucky drops to be eliminated. By that I mean an un-accessible (you can’t turn the gems, these are the gems that will fall next) gem area that will let you see what is comming next if you make a gem match on the main area. You could plan ahead for any match including the column destroyer ability. Luck is out the window, so to speak. :wink:


#18

Although one replier touched on it I find the OP concept mostly flawed when at the very start of each game
the board you get is in itself pure luck.

People have to get past this dislike of losing. Sadly in todays society we bring our kids up to all be “winners” and most just blow a hissy fit when they don’t get their usual win given to them.

As has been posted many times we are already programmed to remember bad outcomes more so than good and I imagine these same people that bleat about a lucky AI outcome giggling with glee when the same fortunate cascade saves them from defeat as a last ditch lucky skull just rolls into place. I have visions of them self congratulating their skillful setup and then 10 minutes later crying foul when the AI gets even something like the same roll.

Life is about winning and losing and there are a lot of people in the world that need to learn to take both with the same grace. Enjoy the game for what it is and learn to accept that unless you cheat your not gonna win everytime and that in cheating the only person you really cheat is yourself.


#19

I don’t like winning out of luck much more than I like losing because the AI got lucky. I think most people would prefer to win based on skill – otherwise, why is the player’s involvement even necessary? The random element is there to give you something to respond to, something to make you think, rather than just follow a simple script, but when it dominates the match, it’s not very satisfying, win or lose.

I think this is probably a significant factor in the memory bias. When players get lucky, it doesn’t change their expected outcome – they expected to win anyway because of other factors, such as preparation and skill. When the AI gets lucky, it can make all that preparation and skill seem unimportant. People are more likely to remember unusual or unexpected events, so the AI getting lucky is more memorable. It’s not as much about whether the event was positive or negative as whether or not it was surprising.


#20

It’s a match 3; luck is supposed to be half of the game.