Just putting my two pennies on this topic: is it ok to lose a match without having the chance to do anything but a first useless move?
PvP is a little broken recently, and I personally think it’s a concept fault to allow an AI driven opponent to win its match without leaving a chance to the human player ( and let’s not forget it, customer ).
I don’t know about you fellas, but personally it really doesn’t make me feel like playing one more match.
There are issues that make PvP more like a burden than something fun. Take for instance the (in)famous team belly dancer rope dart chinese dragon hideous bunny
or the third trait of ugly shrimp when in first position. Not to mention life & death on which many unaknowledged words have been spent already.
it’s all right: PvP has to be more challenging, but is it ok to face a loss at the first turn without standing one single chance?
ps:
It’s not necessary to list all the empowered troops that could work in this scenario, because this would be like tossing a coin: still not enough for a game that is so beautifully strategic and differentiated.
Unfortunately the game/forums are going to agree “yep, this is just part of it”.
But I personally agree with what you’re saying, it’d be nice if there were a slower, strategic mode. That said, I do like using Gems to just brainlessly pass 10 minutes and if you use the teams you mention then you get turn 1 wins.
Seen isnt that hard WIN in that first useless move why whouldnt be possible lose too?
Dunno what’s so unfortunate here, it’s just plain vulcanian logic imo, IF there teams that can win on first turn same teams can aswell wipe you on their first turn unless you counter them, simple, no fortune or unfortune involved.
IF then we wanna make that’s impossible lose on first AI turn then should be the same for OUR wins on first turn.
Between 1) the game has gotten less tactical and more RNG/explosion-based over time, and 2) sometimes you just lose, I can’t manage much more than a *shrug* over this.
My answer to the topic: no, that’s not ok.
Unless you think that at its core this is a gambling game where you can’t influence the results.
If this is supposed to be a strategical/tactical game, then the player should always have a chance. Starting of with an unfortunate board followed by the opponent getting lucky is not something you can influence.
You’re half right! It is fundamentally a gambling game (storms, explosions, skyfall matches, etc…plus, ya know, the entire key/chest system), but it’s one where you can influence the results - by troop selection and in-match decisions.
I hear all your arguments but this battle was lost 2 years ago. GoW is a gambling game to most people who stick around. Even with every troop and using the best possible team for a matchup, there is some small chance the board will be in a bad state for you and you will lose. 100% is impossible. But something around 95% is demonstrably achievable.
That said, until you have teams that can turn 1, you’re not going to hit anything resembling 95%. For the first 8 months or so I played, 85% was a lofty goal. The good thing is the new Explore hints that the devs are interested in giving players stuck in that unsatisfying pit something besides PvP to do while they wait on RNG to bless them.
I still argue some teams seem a little broken, but only if I feel like the most relevant counters have a significantly lower rate than the 90%-95% I tend to maintain.
