Could your game stop cheating for two seconds, please

Against my better judgment I give this game another try, and once again I catch it shamelessly cheating the player.

This time the swindle is surreptitiously withholding mana on wildcard matches. Using Centuragon is the easiest way I’ve found to observe.

Video evidence below:

After using Centuragon’s ability, the brown match (column 8) disappears as if matched but gives zero mana. Centuragon gains nothing.

Second exhibit:

Violet 3-match in column 2 and blue 5-match in row 7 give no mana at all to Zuul’goth, who stays at zero.

Yet another:

Two blue matches and a violet match are all ignored. (Additional gems disappear because Elemental Force hero talent explodes the yellow at row 4 column 4.) Zuul’goth sits by uselessly, snubbing what should have been 36 mana.

Not at all surprised, but I am growing deathy weary of this buggy cheating wreck of a game cherry-picking when it will and won’t deign to follow its own long-established rules.


So many more examples.

0:06 - brown match in row 3 ignored; Centuragon gains zero mana

0:02 - blue match in row 6 ignored; Zuul’goth gains zero mana

0:02 - brown 5-match (centered on row 3 column 5) gives zero mana to Centuragon

0:05 - brown match in column 8 ignored; Centuragon gains zero mana

0:04 - brown match in row 1 ignored; Centuragon gains zero mana

Two in quick succession:
0:03 - brown match in column 1 ignored; Centuragon gains zero mana
0:19 - red wildcards are matched in both rows 1 and 3, but only 6 mana goes to Centuragon when 18 should have been awarded

0:02 - violet match in row 2 ignored; Zuul’goth gains zero mana

I could keep going. This is disgraceful.

1 Like

The nasty little baggins don’t care they just trowel into wallet pockets unashamedly.
Caveat emptor.

If you want to address this to the devs, as it appears you do from the topic and video titles, you’ll want to change the category to #gems-of-war-report-a-bug

There have been previous reports similar to this, so you could also ask one of the mods to merge your findings into those. Here is one example:

I didn´t check all the videos, but in every example I watched the “desired” matches are not the only matches the wildcards are making. Just using the very first video to explain, yes, there is a brown match, but there is also a match with the yellow gem above the wildcards. As I said, similar explanations can be found for every example I checked.

I have to admit, I don´t have the time to read the thread linked by @OneWorld (and all other related threads), but for the examples given in this thread, it seems to me, that wildcards matching with two different colours can´t give mana for both of these colours. In the example I picked, I would say, it “decides” to give yellow mana, which is of course useless for the team and the brown match is neglected. Don´t know, if that has been stated by anyone else in the other threads.

It would for sure be nice to know, what rule the game is using to decide the “preferred” match. Is it just arbitrary? Is there an order of priority among the colours?

Personally, I think, that every match of a wildcard should give mana. If two wildcards next to each other match with two different colours, then mana of both colours should be awarded. I don´t know, if the code isn´t able to handle this situation in this way and therefore has to decide for one colour. If that is the case, there should be an official clarification for this.


The color you need the least.

Kidding, of course, but it does seem like it, doesn’t it?

I assume the game prefers color matches in the same order as it prefers the gathered mana which is the same as the dungeon colors. Blue-Green-Red-Yellow-Purple-Brown


If you go slowly through your videos you can see there is in all your cases another viable combination which prefers the color order above.

In some occasions where 2 or more placeholders are involved, the game prefers (probably) what color match is available with 1 placeholder and uses this information for the resolvement of the spell. About that information I’m not sure but it looks exactly like this.

But what’s really strange is is the fact that gems get takin off the board which weren’t part of the match in the first place. I mean those where you think you would have gathered mana from a color coz of the adjacent gem is gone too after the spell is finished.

1 Like

Good guess, but not the solution, I think. I can find an example, where a blue match is ignored (which should be top priority, following your theory) and also red gets ignored for yellow.

1 Like

This is true for many but it is not true for all.

In video 2 of my first post, examine the leftmost circled wildcard (column 1 row 7).

Blue is the only match it makes, and it disappears from the board as if matched but denies the blue mana it should be providing.

The same can be observed in video 3 of my first post. The wildcards at row 2 column 2 (blue) and row 5 column 5 (violet) have only one possible match each:

Both vanish with the match-made animation while withholding their mana.

In all three cases there is no alternative match that these wildcards gave preference to. They were part of matches that crossed other matches, yes, but if this game engine is too slapdash to handle overlapping horizontal and vertical matches then it never had any business introducing wildcards in the first place.

First example: The two wildcards, that are above each other, also have a yellow match (the gem above). The horizontal line of 4 wildcards form a 5-match of blue, but also the two wildcards on the right are involved in a 4-match of yellow.

Second example: The right wildcard in row 2 and the upper wildcard in column 5 are both also involved in green matches. If your Essence of Evil wouldn´t have been at full mana already, I bet we could see the green mana counted.

Your markers in the picture give a strong indication, how you want the game to evaluate the matches. And looking at the pictures the mind is distracted and realizes these matches first. However, there still ARE other solutions and they seem to be preferred.

About your comment on the difficulties of the code evaluating those mixed up matches: I can only agree to this. As I said before, from my point of view, every match a wildcard is involved in should count.


Probably the game prefers matches from top to bottom row (whatever grants a match first gets the surcharge). Which will explain only green, brown and yellow mana is collected in this case.

This would also explain the 2nd picture from you last post. Only green matches from top to bottom.

I could go through all your videos but i guess it’ll follow this specific order. Dunno if it takes top-to-bottom order above left-to-right order or if it has another preferration but it looks like this.

1 Like

I’m not sure this comes down to preferred evaluations though. I do see your indicated matches; however, the three wildcards I pointed to above (1,7 from video two; 2,2 and 5,5 from video three) were matched by the engine. All three disappeared, and all three had only one possible color they could be paired with. The mana of said colors just never paid out.

Sorry, maybe I didn´t express my thoughts clear enough.

I agree, the matches are made, therefore the gems disappear. And I also agree, that the three specific examples you pointed out now have only one possible match - for themselves. But the match for all of these three examples includes at least one other wildcard and in all three examples the other wildcard allows another match of a different colour. I hope, it is somewhat clear, what I am trying to say :sweat_smile:

However, my guess is, that first all matches are made and realized graphically, then the code starts with the evaluation. And if the code realizes, that there are two matches of different colour, that share a common gem in an identical position (this has to be the wildcard, obviously), then it will decide for one of those two matches and evaluate only this and discard the mana of the other match. Whatever the rule of decision and whatever the reason for this behaviour might be.

And I can only repeat, I don´t think, that this behaviour is correct. I use Centuragon only on rare occassions, so I never spent much time thinking about how complex combinations of wildcards work in detail. I sometimes had the feeling, that I didn´t collect enough mana with Centuragon (I think also 5-matches including multiple wildcards in a L- or T-shape are sort of strange), but never was willing to invest the time and investigate it in such detail. Your videos made me think about it a little more and I think, you did a great job recording all these examples and bringing them to discussion.

By the way, I 100% agree with you, if it should be true, that the code is not able to count ALL matches and must prioritize one, just from a technical point of view, then wildcards shouldn´t have been introduced at all.


The more I look at it the more I think you’ve nailed it. Overlapping multi-color complexes are ignoring every color but one when awarding mana. Looks like it prioritizes only the rightmost or topmost color involved.

Thanks to you and @CaptainAwesome for your insightful scrutiny working this out. Plainly you’ve given it a lot more thought than the devs can be bothered to… (who am I kidding though, that’s not a high hurdle to clear)


Definitely agree with these points – wildcards are the only (or at least first) gem type that can match multiple colors simultaneously so unlike complicated single-color matchups (L’s, T’s, etc) it is a very important design question which color(s) get matched and credited as mana.

I could see an argument that wildcards feel a bit “OP” if they match every color simultaneously, but then we might need a better design rule about which color (or direction) they preferably match with.

1 Like

when these gems were introduced it was claimed and tested that they would give all the matches they made unless this has been nerfed and unnoticed since then because my guild tests all the new gems as released as they highly effect us winning guild wars