Stealthy trait works wrong


#1

Platform, device version and operating system
Windows 10 x64

Screenshot or image
Not needed

What you were expecting to happen, and what actually happened
Any stealthy troop cannot be targeted with spells… unless only stealthy troops remained.

I expect that in “Stealthy” party only first troop will be accessible for targeting. By obvious reason: if you can hit him, you can see him.

In reality “Full stealth” party means “no stealth at all”.

Looks utterly wrong for me. Where do they hide? Behind backs of each other? But even in that case only one must remains, not everyone exposed!

How often does this happen? When did it begin happening?
Always.

Steps to make it happen again
Not needed. It’s systematic bug.


#2

This has always worked this way. If all troops are stealthy, then none are. I expect it’s working as intended, though I suppose there’s never been official confirmation of this.


#3

I agree. It seems to follow pretty obviously from the trait’s effect that it wouldn’t work if all were Stealthy. Feels like a leap of faith to somehow rule that only the first troop can be targeted.


#4

Disagree. From description, effect doesn’t work only if there is noone else to target. So if at least one another troop can be targeted, it must disable targeting of all other.

Of course, it’s pure arbitrary, which exact troop can be targeted. So, as for me, at least two solutions looks natural: one random troop, or first in queue. Second looks more logical for me.

But definitely not “everyone can be targeted”, that is obvious loophole in logic.


#5

I know you disagree. Your opening post put that. I was disagreeing with it :slight_smile:


#6

If all troops can’t be targeted, each individual troop triggers the exception condition for the trait. Each troop resolves the check simultaneously at the start of the turn. What the OP is asking for is serial resolution: the first troop checks, triggers, and then every troop below them remains stealthy because the first troop can now be targeted.

I don’t agree that this is more obvious than the current implementation.


#7

Well, theoretically speaking, I could change my opinion after first replies. :slight_smile:

Just to prove or disprove this opinion, I asked my friends. Results was interesting: almost anyone familiar with tabletop card games (especially MtG) thinks that current implementation is totally right and obvious. While all others expected that all units will be invisible - or only one of them will be possible target (just as me :slight_smile:

Again: I see arguments for both points of view now. But in mechanical sense (in my opinion) current implementation haven’t sense. Stealth ability is not very powerful now as is, and taken into account that every stealth troop (after first) diminish effect even more, it became close to worthless in any scenario, except “only one stealth unit per team”. Indeed, it’s only scenario I usually see in PvP.

I doubt that it was intended to work this way, so question.

If I am wrong - well, let it be. But I want to hear it from developers before give up. :slight_smile:


#8

I think your explanation is sensible, but most players are satisfied with how it works now. It’s not likely the devs will change a behavior without a lot of community support.


#9

You can have 3 stealthy troops on a team and none of them are targetable as long as there is a 4th non-stealthy troop.

Not going to speak for the devs but pretty sure it’s working as intended since the wording is “cannot be targeted by spells (unless there are no other targets)”. If all 4 troops are stealthy and you look at each individual troop separately, the condition for being able to bypass stealthy on each one is met because all other troops can’t be targeted.

Personally it doesn’t make much sense that only the 1st troop would be targetable in this instance because the bypass condition is met for each of them, not just the 1st. But that’s my personal opinion and makes the most sense to me.


#10

When traits were implemented on console, this is how it worked. Sadly, this meant that if your opponent had a 4x stealthy team and you chose a spell that targets a specific enemy, the game crashed. People were exploiting this by putting up 4x Spirit Fox teams to try to bait people into crash losses. I think the current implementation is both functional and logical.


#11

Look on this other way: if you have particular stealthy troop that you don’t want to be targeted, in scenario of “one such troop” it cannot be targeted, before all other three troops will be killed.

In case it’s one such troop and three stealth one, any of your stealth troops will be targetable just after you lose your only non-stealth one. Three times faster, at least.

And here is loophole is (that became the reason of such behavior initially, I believe). Mechanically you are right, and most probably it’s how it’s implemented. But rationally it haven’t any sense: what “stealthy” in any other troop, if actually you can target any of them? In that logic Stealth must not work at all: if you targeted stealthy unit - you, obviously, cannot target any other unit simultaneously, so you always must be able to target this unit, regardless of other stealth, just with the same reasons.

All three implementations are logical, if look on it right way. :slight_smile:

  1. There are no valid targets, if only stealth units remained.

Contradiction: I believe, option “if other units exist” was implemented exactly to counter such option. So in spirit of rules, such behavior is wrong (while it still can be right mechanically).

  1. Units on field represents actual troops. (That’s how I look on situation). In that case they, obviously, must go in queue or in column, where only first (upper) one is close to enemy, and all others are behind him. In that representation, any stealthy unit simply hides behind other backs if targeted. I believe, some party dungeon crawlers implemented exactly this mechanic of stealth.

In such case, obviously, if no non-stealth units remained, first one must be targetable - he cannot hide behind others with the same ability.

It’s override of rules, of course. But the same override as current “everyone targetable”, actually.

  1. Units on field represents just that. Cards on field. They are purely abstract and haven’t any “physical” properties. In that case, of course, they can have any rules implemented (and that’s how MtG players actually answered me :). They viewed Stealth as sort of “zero aggro”. Non-stealth units have it more than zero, so can be targeted any time. But if no such units remained, you are free to select any other, equally zero aggro, targets.

Of course, it is the same artificial rule as #2. But it’s implemented already. I don’t like it, just because I don’t want to look on game units as abstract chess pieces, instead actual entities. But, as I see now (I didn’t see it initially), it’s perfectly legal approach. Only unpleasant one, in my opinion.


#12

how the trait works is explained perfectly in the trait description on the card.

just because they share the same name as other games, doesn’t mean it has to work exactly the same.

or rename stealthy to “less important” if stealthy cause too much confusion.