Let's take this scenario:
- Two characters, one Desert Nomad and one Kotoba
- After cards are played, the Desert Nomad has 16 Attack, 0 Defense and 16 health
- After cards are played, the Kotoba has 16 Attack, 3 Defense and 13 health
- Both die and end up with 0 Health. This is balanced.
- At the end Kotoba wins with a Score of 16 versus the Desert Nomad's Score of 13.This is unbalanced.

My suggestion is simple:
Add the total Printed Health of your characters to your own Score.
There, fixed.

How hard is it to implement this?

Dernière modification par Nurvus (24-08-2012 01:49:50)

Stormholt · 21-08-2012 21:50:53

Or implement a Damage Reduction for Nomads (Another Shakira of Napyts)... And most of 'em cure, that's why they got high health...

Wolvos · 22-08-2012 13:35:11

hp it's a really bad by now, thats why cards deal a lot more damage

just remember 1 year ago nomad vs mages : nomad wins
now : mages wins

Nurvus · 22-08-2012 14:12:27

Stormholt a écrit :

Or implement a Damage Reduction for Nomads (Another Shakira of Napyts)... And most of 'em cure, that's why they got high health...

I'm not taking about guild/race/character balance... Shoo...
I'm talking about SCORE.
Those pretty numbers at the end of a game...

I am saying that Nomads are penalized in the Score because they have health to compensate the lack of defense.

If I have 15 health, and you have 12 health and 3 defense, my 15 health counts for your score, and while your 12 health count for my score, your 3 defense doesn't.
The defense is there every fight, as well!

In 1 fight, 15 health is equivalent to 12 health + 3 defense = 15 if we both hit each other once.
In 2 fights, 12 health + 3 defense becomes at least 18 health because physical damage gets reduced by 3 at least twice.
In 3 fights, 12 health + 3 defense becomes at least 21 health because physical damage gets reduced by 3 at least three times.

It keeps going like that.
I am not even complaining about that!
I'm complaining that at the end of the battle, if all characters have 0 health, Nomad ALWAYS loses. ALWAYS.

And the sollution is SUPER EASY!
Add the PRINTED HEALTH of a player's characters to HIS OWN SCORE.

So if you got characters with 14 + 14 + 13 Health, and I got characters with 15 + 15 + 16 health, at the end of the game, you get 41 extra Score, and I get 46.

Dernière modification par Nurvus (22-08-2012 14:42:09)

TheRainMan · 22-08-2012 14:23:49

You dont thing far enough on this theme nurvus

Yes, Defense of 0 and higher health is a disadvantage in some cases, but also a advantage in some cases

Imagine if you play Pirate Maros vs Nomads, the card putting the enemy defense to 0 becomes useless, you have 1 card less in your hand and a disadvantage.

Or cards making your defense =X, especially obesity is incredibly strong on nomads and so on.

Your solution would be a good buff for nomads, which is completely nonsense right now, because they will get a fucking op legendary very soon.

Nurvus · 22-08-2012 14:28:21

Dude, are you high?

I have more health.
You have more defense.
My extra health is added to your score.
Your extra defense is NOT added to my score.
Sollution, add MY printed health to MY score and YOUR printed health to YOUR score. This is balanced.
(Note: Adding defense, spirit or mitigated damage does NOT work and would be unbalanced as well.)

I'm not complaining about nomads having higher health and lower defense...
I'm not saying nomads are weaker or stronger or anything...

I'm complaining about the unbalanced Score at the end of a game.
Just the score.

Assuming nomads are balanced in terms of gameplay, the SCORE is unbalanced, because if every character ends up with 0 Health, Nomads will ALWAYS LOSE IN SCORE.

I repeat, at the end of a game, if all the characters are dead with 0 Health, Nomads lose in Score because they have more health.
That, is unbalanced.

All I am asking, is to ADD each character's printed health values to the Score of his own player at the end of the game.
That is all I am asking.
It will NOT change gameplay.
It will simply make Score at the end of a game balanced.

Dernière modification par Nurvus (22-08-2012 14:38:41)

UIA · 22-08-2012 16:20:51

Its an interesting idea. I've played eclipse a lot and generally if all char dead at the end its a loss on points so I can see your frustration. However I don't have many other decks where the other opposing char are dead by round 3 and 5 is usually the max before game is over. I guess I think of it as a tradeoff, yeah its normal to lose on points but on the other hand its usually got a good chance to make it where the end score doesn't matter. I checked history avg game length with eclipse is 2-3 minutes as opposed to say, demon hunter which is maybe around 4-6 min so with regards to time spent playing its very efficient at crystal farming.

Im not sure which nomad decks you playing since you didn't specify, when I play immortals they get lots of pts from healing and fair to high dmg and temple guardians can be very tanky and get decent dmg so I don't see end score as a usual loss for either. Really the only nomad deck I've experienced consistent loss on pts is eclipse.

I think adding printed health to score wouldn't necessarily be a good thing, it kinda ignores all the other concessions and design choices they've made to alleviate high hp 0 defense, in the end it just awards extra pts to those with the biggest hp chars, irregardless to the strategy involved.

Nurvus a écrit :

...
Assuming nomads are balanced in terms of gameplay, the SCORE is unbalanced, because if every character ends up with 0 Health, Nomads will ALWAYS LOSE IN SCORE.
I repeat, at the end of a game, if all the characters are dead with 0 Health, Nomads lose in Score because they have more health.
That, is unbalanced
...

It would be a good example if every game ended with every char with 0 health..

Wolvos · 22-08-2012 16:31:05

TheRainMan a écrit :

You dont thing far enough on this theme nurvus
Yes, Defense of 0 and higher health is a disadvantage in some cases, but also a advantage in some cases
Imagine if you play Pirate Maros vs Nomads, the card putting the enemy defense to 0 becomes useless, you have 1 card less in your hand and a disadvantage.
Or cards making your defense =X, especially obesity is incredibly strong on nomads and so on.
Your solution would be a good buff for nomads, which is completely nonsense right now, because they will get a fucking op legendary very soon.

forgot the combo infernal cricket+pocket shooter, instakills nomads

rutse · 22-08-2012 18:13:28

That's why they heal a lot.

Heals DOES count to SCORE

Cursed items hurt yourself, AOE cards like Storm too, and the damage you do to yourself , count to you or to enemy?

Dernière modification par rutse (22-08-2012 18:17:39)

skadooosh · 22-08-2012 18:55:06

yep nomads have a disadvantage with the score.
But they also have an advantage against direct damage. (as they have more health, it's less important...)

I like this idea to add the health points to the score...

Wolvos · 22-08-2012 20:32:01

rutse a écrit :

That's why they heal a lot.
Heals DOES count to SCORE

Cursed items hurt yourself, AOE cards like Storm too, and the damage you do to yourself , count to you or to enemy?

damage done to your characters, always adds points to enemy's score

like i said before, 1 year ago, when the cards caused less damage, have high hp was benefit, your character was always alive (they played solaris too ;P)

trust me this problem have not a directed relationship with the stats itself (if you don't play against multi attack decks/pocket shooter bullsh1t)

i played with mages when the best combo were prophet, pilkim & erevent, and the nomads were difficult to beat

Dernière modification par Wolvos (22-08-2012 20:33:01)

Stormholt · 22-08-2012 20:36:44

rutse a écrit :

Cursed items hurt yourself, AOE cards like Storm too, and the damage you do to yourself , count to you or to enemy?

The damage of Cursed itens count as points for your enemy, it used to count for you, but we had some abuses with Flames of Phoenix..

TheRainMan · 22-08-2012 21:25:40

Nurvus a écrit :

Dude, are you high?
I have more health.
You have more defense.
My extra health is added to your score.
Your extra defense is NOT added to my score.
Sollution, add MY printed health to MY score and YOUR printed health to YOUR score. This is balanced.
(Note: Adding defense, spirit or mitigated damage does NOT work and would be unbalanced as well.)
I'm not complaining about nomads having higher health and lower defense...
I'm not saying nomads are weaker or stronger or anything...
I'm complaining about the unbalanced Score at the end of a game.
Just the score.
Assuming nomads are balanced in terms of gameplay, the SCORE is unbalanced, because if every character ends up with 0 Health, Nomads will ALWAYS LOSE IN SCORE.
I repeat, at the end of a game, if all the characters are dead with 0 Health, Nomads lose in Score because they have more health.
That, is unbalanced.
All I am asking, is to ADD each character's printed health values to the Score of his own player at the end of the game.
That is all I am asking.
It will NOT change gameplay.
It will simply make Score at the end of a game balanced.

You must be high.

Your idea is a clear BUFF for the nomads, even if its only the score, and this is unecessary.

Like already mentioned, nomads have advantages and disavantages through their high health and low defense (e.g stronger vs direct dmg like the courtisans and so..). And if you take the disadvantages from them, you make them stronger

Dernière modification par TheRainMan (22-08-2012 21:29:19)

Nurvus · 22-08-2012 22:06:29

So you're saying that when all characters die, Nomads lose, is balance? It's fair? It's intended? It's part of their "weaknesses"?

If you agree that nomads are fairly balanced with other guilds in terms of damage dealing and survival, that everyone has their strengths and weaknesses, then you are forced to agree that they have a disadvantage in score.

It would make sense to be penalized in score, if Nomads were somehow slightly better than the rest?

But no, Nomads are no better than the rest, and yet, if all their characters die, they lose because score counts Health, but doesn't count defense, spirit or damage reduction.

If you manage to get my health to 0, and I manage to get your health to 0, YOU always win.

How can you say that is balanced?

To kill your character with 12 health and 3 defense, assuming I one-shot it, I will have to deal 15 damage, and will only get a score of 12.
For you to kill my character of 15 health and 0 defense, assuming you one-shot it, you have to deal 15 damage, and will get a score of 15.
That's unbalanced.

If, however, my printed healths are added to my score, and your printed healths are added to your score, it means I get +15 to my score of 12 = 27, and you get +12 to your score of 15 = 27, and thus, as both characters ended up with 0 health, we reached a draw.

If you say I have cards to make my defense = 2, well you also have cards to increase your defense by +3 or +4. That's irrelevant.

When I say Nomads, I'm giving a rough example.
Any team of low health and high defenses (kotoba warriors, etc) has a clear Score advantage against a team of high health and low defenses (nomad, ice elf, war guemelite runics, etc)

Dernière modification par Nurvus (22-08-2012 22:11:54)

phaustus · 23-08-2012 22:16:18

For starters, I think that damaging your own cards or healing your opponent's shouldn't be taken into account for score totals at all. After all, your opponent wasn't the one dealing the damage, so why should he get an advantage from it?

This renders certain cards completely useless. It definitely shouldn't go back to when it was counted for your score either, because it would just make those same cards too strong.

Also, I would tend to agree that high HPs (most applicable to Nomads, but also others, as already mentioned) need a way to counteract the inherent disadvantage of yielding your opponent more points.

As it currently stands, a character with
2 Spirit
2 Defense
14 HP

will always be better than one with
0 Spirit
0 Defense
16 HP

*unless* your opponent is playing a pure DD deck (which, then, kind of becomes an unnecessary nerf/trump to DD decks match-up wise).

In the above example, character #1 will always yields 2 less score, no matter what.

And to those saying Nomads heal a lot, well, healing ends up being about as good as + to defense or spirit or even additional damage and everyone has access to those... (if you are healing for 3, and your opponent increased his defense by 3, you will end up with a similar score, as you gained 3 extra from healing, but gained 3 less from damaging him). That means the Nomads just have a different gameplay, it in no way compensates for them having no defense or spirit.

As a lot of other people have already commented in other threads, when Nomads first came out, those 16HP seemed like a lot. Nowadays, it pales in comparison with defensive/offensive monsters with 1 or 2 less HP but with 3 more defense or spirit, or more attack... Their entire line-up would need to be revised.

Personally, I think that if they either increased all their HP by 1 or 2 points, or implemented a scoring system like proposed, we might see them again near or at the top (without the need for a ridiculous legendary like Sap Heart). Cause let's face it, you don't see Nomads decks past 1800 Elo (AFAIK), so making them stronger wouldn't be a bad thing at all, it would only help diversify decktypes in high Elo ranks (which currently pretty much only consists of Thunder blast, Compendium and Sap Heart Legendary).

Nurvus · 23-08-2012 22:58:59

I agree alot of characters have ridiculous Health, like Ourenos who has 3 Defense and 16 Health, compared to most Nomads who have 0 Defense and 16 Health.

But the balance of decks has nothing to do with what I'm discussing here.

The only thing I'm really complaining about is that, if you assume a deck that focuses on high defense/spirit, versus a deck that focuses on high Health, and decks that focus on direct, magic or physical damage, or even health loss, assuming all decks are balanced, at the end of a fight, if all characters have 0 health, a deck that has a higher Printed Health total always loses.
This is inadmissible.

My suggestion is ridiculously simple and fixes everything without exceptions.
Each player adds to his own score, the total Printed Health of his own characters.

Fixed.
With this, if all characters have 0 health, it's a draw.

Dernière modification par Nurvus (23-08-2012 23:03:45)

phaustus · 23-08-2012 23:37:36

Nurvus a écrit :

I agree alot of characters have ridiculous Health, like Ourenos who has 3 Defense and 16 Health, compared to most Nomads who have 0 Defense and 16 Health.
But the balance of decks has nothing to do with what I'm discussing here.
The only thing I'm really complaining about is that, if you assume a deck that focuses on high defense/spirit, versus a deck that focuses on high Health, and decks that focus on direct, magic or physical damage, or even health loss, assuming all decks are balanced, at the end of a fight, if all characters have 0 health, a deck that has a higher Printed Health total always loses.
This is inadmissible.
My suggestion is ridiculously simple and fixes everything without exceptions.
Each player adds to his own score, the total Printed Health of his own characters.
Fixed.
With this, if all characters have 0 health, it's a draw.

Well, it could be argued that if you use high health characters, you have more chances of being the one ending up with a single character standing at the end of the fight, thus assuring you victory, and you "pay" for that by giving your opponent more possible score.

In the case of characters that have other defensive stats, however, this is offset by the fact that they will yield less score on a "per attack" basis. Whereas characters that have high HP but with no defensive stats whatsoever (like Nomads) are purely disadvantaged, unless they can somehow have surviving characters (which, again, is unlikely, due to the fact that their base stats are actually lower than most other characters' and their gameplay is mostly aggressive and their healing is not any better than other offensive or defensive stats).

Nurvus · 24-08-2012 00:19:17

phaustus a écrit :

Well, it could be argued that if you use high health characters, you have more chances of being the one ending up with a single character standing at the end of the fight, thus assuring you victory, and you "pay" for that by giving your opponent more possible score.

No, it couldn't be argued, because you start going into character balance wich is a different subject.

Any given character is supposed to be balanced around his stats, the cards he can play and the strategy he can participate in.

If a character has more health, he probably is going to pay for it with something else, like lower defense or spirit, or weaker card availability.

If you argue that there are characters with more health and no disadvantages to compensate, that's a design flaw, and has nothing to do with what I am debating.

I am saying that assuming a balanced game, the way Score is calculated is unbalanced against characters with higher health, even if that character has higher defense as well.

Imagine two characters:
Character A - 16 health, 3 defense, 5/8 Attack
Character B - 12 health, 2 defense, 7/11 Attack

Character A can kill Character B in 2-4 attacks.
Character B can kill Character A in 2-4 attacks.

Assuming both deal either max or min damage all the time, both reach 0 Health at the same time, but Character A always loses because of Score.

This also answers to the rest of your post.

This thread has nothing to do with healing, damage reduction, defense, etc.
It has simply to do with the fact that if 2 characters have an equal chance to win, the one with higher health is penalized in Score, regardless of everything else.

Dernière modification par Nurvus (24-08-2012 00:26:20)

goscar · 24-08-2012 01:41:39

Sorry but I disagree. I play Temple Guardians and with things like Forced March, Litany and Miracle I can easily negate massive damage. When my deck has a shortcoming I do what I can to overcome it, not try to get the game changed.

Nurvus · 24-08-2012 01:49:01

goscar a écrit :

Sorry but I disagree. I play Temple Guardians and with things like Forced March, Litany and Miracle I can easily negate massive damage. When my deck has a shortcoming I do what I can to overcome it, not try to get the game changed.

Or maybe complain powder mechanic is completely overpowered.

I'm not sure what you disagree with.
Or rather, I'm pretty sure you didn't even read right.

I'm not complaining on the ability to survive or to kill that the Nomads have.
I'm complaining about high health characters being at disadvantage in Score at the end of every game.

Health is a stat like all others, except you don't count enemy defense towards your score, or enemy spirit, or enemy damage reduction.
But they count your extra health towards their score.

So just like your healing counts towards your score, I suggest your printed health also gets added to your score, because only then it will be balanced.

nemoutopia · 24-08-2012 01:52:23

To be misunderstood by every n00b with a keyboard who can neither read a disclaimer nor be bothered to read what your actual message is...oh, Nurvus, do I feel your pain -_-

While I personally agree with you, I think the answer is going to be the characters with a defense score are MEANT to win in the scenario you are presenting. So I'll play devil's advocate for a moment: From a design standpoint, it can be argued that defense (and spirit, especially on characters that are not mages) isn't simply about keeping your characters alive, it is meant to consistently reduce your opponent's score by reducing how far into the negative an opponent can push your health score when they kill you. In the current game state, this is also why two decks that both achieve reducing the opponent to exactly zero get there different ways...do decks that increased their own attack or decreased the opposing defense incrementally deserve the same score as a deck that use a 'defense = 0' card?

While I personally agree with you, I can understand why the Feerik designers wouldn't...it's comparable to difference ways of scoring Go. Which way you prefer is a personal choice, there isn't really a right/wrong answer without talking about personal preference, opinion, or emotion (which means there simply ISN'T an objectively right/wrong choice).

goscar · 24-08-2012 01:52:28

I think you are mistaken about higher health leading to lower score, since any overkill (when health is in negative) gets counted toward your score. If it did stopped at printed health then having high health would be a disadvantage.

Wolvos · 24-08-2012 01:58:57

yeah, but nomads (in this case) have less spirit, less defense and the same attack, thats unbalanced thats the problem, the bad stats of the characters

Dernière modification par Wolvos (24-08-2012 01:59:45)

Nurvus · 24-08-2012 02:00:14

goscar a écrit :

I think you are mistaken about higher health leading to lower score, since any overkill (when health is in negative) gets counted toward your score. If it did stopped at printed health then having high health would be a disadvantage.

The logic is this:
If the opponent manages to take 16 of your health in the same time you take 13 of his, if you keep going into the negatives, you'll end up with a more negative Health than him.

Higher health values are often compensated with lower defenses, or lower attack, or ability, lack of caste, guild, etc.
In a balanced scenario, there's always some kind of compensation.

If you have lower defense and/or attack, your opponent will probably overkill you more than you overkill him.

Again, speaking of relatively balanced scenarios.
---

My suggestion is simple, minor, and actually fixes this issue with NO loose ends.
You add to each player's Score the total Printed Health of his own characters.
This is what's missing.
This is one of the issues that has been unbalancing every game until now.
All those Draws that should've been a Win/Loss.
All those Wins/Losses that should've been a Draw.

Dernière modification par Nurvus (24-08-2012 02:04:21)

goscar · 24-08-2012 02:12:04

So what you are saying that if your opponent manages to do more damage than you because you fail to pack defensive cards you shouldn't lose.

Eredan's World

Annonce

#1 21-08-2012 20:29:17

Printed Health vs Score

#2 21-08-2012 21:50:53

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#3 22-08-2012 13:35:11

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#4 22-08-2012 14:12:27

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#5 22-08-2012 14:23:49

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#6 22-08-2012 14:28:21

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#7 22-08-2012 16:20:51

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#8 22-08-2012 16:31:05

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#9 22-08-2012 18:13:28

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#10 22-08-2012 18:55:06

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#11 22-08-2012 20:32:01

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#12 22-08-2012 20:36:44

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#13 22-08-2012 21:25:40

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#14 22-08-2012 22:06:29

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#15 23-08-2012 22:16:18

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#16 23-08-2012 22:58:59

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#17 23-08-2012 23:37:36

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#18 24-08-2012 00:19:17

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#19 24-08-2012 01:41:39

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#20 24-08-2012 01:49:01

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#21 24-08-2012 01:52:23

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#22 24-08-2012 01:52:28

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#23 24-08-2012 01:58:57

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#24 24-08-2012 02:00:14

Re : Printed Health vs Score

#25 24-08-2012 02:12:04

Re : Printed Health vs Score

Pied de page des forums