Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, elit eget consectetuer adipiscing aenean dolor

Devs, your Luck AI changes have ruined this game!

it applies to player and ai, so what is the problem ?

It slows down and make some troops/teams/combos useless.

I meant that a slower match has more turnovers. At some point the controlling player (human or AI) runs out of mana to cast control spells and must stop to recharge. That’s only possible if filling troops with unstrategic control spells (exploders, troops with free extra turns) becomes the exception rather than the rule.

Gems of War exists in a very constrained “fun window.” Pre-3.0.5, the game, for all its foibles, managed to exist within that window. The game pacing is off, and I believe the extra mana both teams get is a big contributor to that off-kilter pacing.

2 Likes

would apply to both sides, too.

i never experience a slowdown btw

I never said it wouldn’t apply to both sides. So where you got that from? I said that I prefer the +4 mana surges as humans more often gets benefit from it than CPU that is still somewhat stupid(but better than before). I am saying basically what Lyya is saying.

I can’t tell you what the devs are thinking, but I would assume they tried to adopt the Console mana generation rules and are now regretting it. After all, the lack of surges on 4-matches always seemed like a bug. Here’s my mea culpa on this:

http://community.gemsofwar.com/t/why-do-4-gem-matches-never-mana-surge/9538

As to troops like YC, the team you provided actually feels somewhat safer to me having tried it in the beta, since when she does misfire, the opponent isn’t able to chain as wildly as before. This is one girl’s opinion, though. I don’t begrudge you your own.

you wrote that some troops would be useless. i thought this was a complaint. so i meant this would also make ai troops useless.

When the Devs decides to take away things that I like from this game I will complain, always. In this case we are talking about the +4 mana surges, that most probably will wave bye bye soon.

It also depends how they decide the RNG and random gems creator algorithm will be like. Maybe they will adjust it when they take away the +4 mana surges. That way at least some teams I listed will still have some function.

random should be random for both sides. i myself used a random generator when i once programmed a poker game. that is no higher science.

Again, I never said that the random should not be random for both sides. Are you able to not misunderstand for once?

i did understand you. i meant there is only one RNG, so it should be fair.

Yeah, I was talking about that they may be tweaking the RNG in a better way when it comes to how some troops generate random gems on the boards, so we might miss less out on the + 4 mana surges. This way Yasmine Chosen f.example will survive. @lyya can you see any other changes in how troops that randomly generates gems performs and generally any new changes to the CPU in the beta version?

do you mean by “tweaking the rng” that some troops should generate more gems ?

no, not more gems. But perhaps generally a better cluster than it does now. Just an idea how to make up when x4 mana surge will go away.

forgive me when i am wrong but do you mean that the created gems should find better places on the board ?

I am saying that troops that creates random gems can be tweaked so they create generally more a cluster of gems, that way some troops/teams will survive without being depended on x4 mana surges.

something like “IF TROOP = X THEN GEM+1” or something like that ?

Not at all, I am not talking about changes to the troops spell, no. I gotta go now.

so i wonder what change this should be. neither casting more gems nor making spellls less expensive.
maybe it’s not my best day but english is not my native language. a better cluster means more gems to me.
so that was my point when i wrote +1 (or more) for specific troops.