Easing Cards Color Restrictions

[Asraiel]

@Majora - MidnaMistfire well this was a maybe suggestion and also something that may can be used in events (rainbowcolor) i see ur poin but adding more power to pure cards is a huge poject cause u will have to balance a lot by changeing it. 

Battleforge was released in 2009 and shut down in 2013 now its 2021 during the 4 years of existance amii and renegade was added to the game so a lot of expansion in only 4 years

in 2015 the closed alpha started and now 8 years after shut down adding new content doesnt seem to be a bad idea if phenomic would not have been sold to ea the game may have expirienced more expansions over the time. 

i think in 2019 was closed beta and in 2020 open beta and now with full release this is also allredy 1-2 years without major changes (expansions) and when thinking back the game did run 4.5 yeas in total then 1-2 years is a very long time. also others see that there needs something to be done for the game:

so expanding possebilitys in deck creation is a simplke yet effective way to add new content to the game. i rather play a game where i dont have to wait 30 mins to fill a 12 player map. i can remeber the old days where it was a matter of 2-5 mins to find 12 players for a map. and the more the merryer. better than a dead game that doesnt change. as european its better atm but if ur from a other continent u have a lot of troubble finding players during the happy hour gametime 6 pm - 12pm. shure adding comercial may improof but its expand the content has a greater effect. 

if adding content means i can enjoy the game more and have to search less for mates to play im happy. im the creator of my decks i have it in my hands who i combine the cards.

for pvp i mean fire wow so powerfull firedance t2 juggernouth t3 hella powerfull but reaching t4 than gather enouth power to use a enlightenment + the power for the unit after it noone would do that.

so where can u use it rpve. after reaching t4 its tecnicly a steamroll (if not playing batariel) so no big strategic gameplay spaming heals all the time. in pve campain when u reach t4 the game is almost won allredy finding the changes is hard tru playing a 4player map solo on expert there u will have it a bit easier but cause u do it solo u barly have cardslot free in a deck. and only keep the game as it is for the sake of those that like to show everyone that they got the longest d*** they can proof it with showing their replay.

[Majora]

Im a bit confused about what we are now discussing. I get the feeling you imply I dont want changes to be made to the game, especially since the game is out for so long. I totaly agree however. I am looking forward to the new amii cards, maybe fire/frost in the future, tweaks to cards in general to keep things fresh, etc. But I dont see what that has to do with the difference between pure cards and splashable cards? 

I am all for changes, I just think we should keep the core (what does it mean to be a certain faction, how do monuments work, etc) of battleforge the same. 

[Asraiel]

@Majora - MidnaMistfire well then sorry i did understand ur replys in the way that ur against it. against legendary cards and new cards that allows diffrent deckcombos 

Fire/frost and Nature/shadow shure need some cards but just useing the models from other cards and changeing the colors a bit may work for some alldo a few would be nice to have a new and fresh design. Frost/Fire also has the problem that they are more less enemys fire has many anti frost shield cards but it has also some openings like frostburn, fireshield, melting away frozen units.

[macabi]

The problem we have right now is that some cards are very restrictive (e.g. Lost Warlord) while other cards are not restrictive at all (e.g. Lost Spirit Ship).

That makes the game unbalanced.

So the right approach is either make restrictive cards less restrictive or make them more powerful while leaving them restrictive.

Another approach is to add another version of the same restrictive card making the new card less restrictive while making it less powerful (e.g. remove its affinity).

[Danol]

There are some cards whose orb-restrictions should be eased, no doubt about that. On the other hand there are also cards whose restrictions are too lax or just right. So my suggestion is to discuss this on a card-by-card basis.

[Asraiel]

16 hours ago, Danol said:

discuss this on a card-by-card basis.

that would be the best way but it will take long to find the best choise cause there are so many cards 

16 hours ago, macabi said:

The problem we have right now is that some cards are very restrictive (e.g. Lost Warlord) while other cards are not restrictive at all (e.g. Lost Spirit Ship).

its not good to only look at the orbs there cause the units in that case differs a lot in dmg and hp + also what type of dmg and hp (counter) also bonus skills and passiv skills.

Spirit ship is good counter for medium units and has a knock back on small and medium but doesnt have a main attack so even by setting a target it will attack otherstuff as well and not focus the target. whats more it has less hp (on 0 upgrades its allredy 2800hp) than the warlord. on the otherhand warlord is also a melee ground unit so it applies the how many melee units can attak the same target on XL vs XL its limited to 3 units per target. but also has to be taken in consideration that it can attack while moveing compaired to groundunits with long range attacks which need to stop in order to attack. just to mention a few diffrence

 

finding there a healthy balance will be hard + it also need to be taken a look what other units, spells and building are supprotet from its colorcombination + the rarety of the card itself and powercost to get the overall picture. and upon changeing 1 unit what does that mean to the balancing, what other cards has to be rebalanced in due to the change.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Asraiel

[Volin]

33 minutes ago, Asraiel said:

Spirit ship is good counter for small and medium units but since its dmg type is splash it aint a counter to a specific type and so doesnt get the +50% counter dmg and has no main attack so even by setting a target it will attack otherstuff as well and not focus the target.

M Counter..  

[Asraiel]

edited @Volin

 

Edited April 7, 2021 by Asraiel

[Danol]

13 hours ago, Asraiel said:

that would be the best way but it will take long to find the best choise cause there are so many cards

Maybe, but trying to fix them all in one go is all but guaranteed to not find the best solution.

[Asraiel]

A possebility would be makeing a balancing and try it on testservers to then make more ajustments if needed. 

if i would have to choose i would first lay the focus on cards that are almost never used by players. maybe those cards can be found over card traccers or so to realy find the not used ones and then start there with ajustments and balancing.

balancing of used cards allways have many pros and contras also to keep in mind that the nostalgic factor needs to be kept since the majority of the players know the game from EA and every change erases a part of the game like it was. makeing unused cards more popular aint a bad thing.

 

for the example the Lost Spirit Ship a card often used in rpve and pve changeing it kind destroys the nostalgic factor that the card has and if it get buffed or debuffed it will always have many peoples that wouldnt like it. 

 

a diffrent story would be if a set of new cards would get into the game like in other topis the combination of shadow/nature or Fire/Frost then a balancing thruly is needed specialy for pvp use. in pve it doesnt have much impact. cause the major goal of every map in pve and rpve is to win

[Danol]

Finding seldom used cards is not that hard (for the developers), but I doubt that these are such a good starting point. Card usage is determined by a bunch of factors, the power of the card is just one of them. For example most cards requiring 4 orbs of the same color will not be used as much as a card requiring only one orb of a specific color, because it can't be splashed (examples: Forest Elder or Dreadnought). Expensive cards might be used less, because many players don't have them, despite of their (often) obvious power. Mediocre cards that are dirt cheap and flexible, on the other hand, are used a lot (Giant Wyrm, for example), despite not being on top of the foodchain. It's like in real live: Popularity is a very poor measure for quality. You have to look at the dirty details, there's no way around it.

 

The extreme cases might be worth investigating, though. If a card is almost always used if possible, it might be too good. If a card is seldom used even if possible, it might be too bad. But you definitely have to normalize with regard to orb requirements. And all that does not answer the simple question if the orb requirements are sensible in the first place.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Danol

[DieToPlay]

1 hour ago, Asraiel said:

A possebility would be makeing a balancing and try it on testservers to then make more ajustments if needed. 

if i would have to choose i would first lay the focus on cards that are almost never used by players. maybe those cards can be found over card traccers or so to realy find the not used ones and then start there with ajustments and balancing.

balancing of used cards allways have many pros and contras also to keep in mind that the nostalgic factor needs to be kept since the majority of the players know the game from EA and every change erases a part of the game like it was. makeing unused cards more popular aint a bad thing.

 

for the example the Lost Spirit Ship a card often used in rpve and pve changeing it kind destroys the nostalgic factor that the card has and if it get buffed or debuffed it will always have many peoples that wouldnt like it. 

 

a diffrent story would be if a set of new cards would get into the game like in other topis the combination of shadow/nature or Fire/Frost then a balancing thruly is needed specialy for pvp use. in pve it doesnt have much impact. cause the major goal of every map in pve and rpve is to win

I agree, 1st buff unused cards, and then see if tweaks are needed for others.

[Asraiel]

8 hours ago, Danol said:

Finding seldom used cards is not that hard (for the developers), but I doubt that these are such a good starting point. Card usage is determined by a bunch of factors, the power of the card is just one of them. For example most cards requiring 4 orbs of the same color will not be used as much as a card requiring only one orb of a specific color, because it can't be splashed (examples: Forest Elder or Dreadnought). Expensive cards might be used less, because many players don't have them, despite of their (often) obvious power. Mediocre cards that are dirt cheap and flexible, on the other hand, are used a lot (Giant Wyrm, for example), despite not being on top of the foodchain. It's like in real live: Popularity is a very poor measure for quality. You have to look at the dirty details, there's no way around it.

the mentoned cards in this quote are primaly units but there are also buildings and spells in the game that doesnt get used often like:

Girlpower, Envenom, Fire Bomb, Glacier Shell, Mumbo Jumbo,  Snapjaws, Bandit Spearmen, Ghostspears, Lost Priest, Revenant's Blessing and many more (these are t1 and t2 cards)

 

*it may that some of the example cards have a higher use in pvp (due to being a pve player i cant tell)

 

8 hours ago, Danol said:

The extreme cases might be worth investigating, though. If a card is almost always used if possible, it might be too good. If a card is seldom used even if possible, it might be too bad. But you definitely have to normalize with regard to orb requirements. 

Useage of a card also comes withe the price (BFP) of it and how accesseble it is, nerfing cards that just being used very often aint the right way (cause that would also lead to nerf t1 cards)

8 hours ago, Danol said:

And all that does not answer the simple question if the orb requirements are sensible in the first place.

specialy for t4 color specific cards i made a post for a new card that would solve the problem in one way 

 

[Xamos]

On 2/6/2021 at 6:07 AM, chickennoodler said:

If anything, we should be INCREASING orb restriction

The entire purpose of the game is to think around this.

Yes, i agree.

 

On 4/3/2021 at 3:16 AM, Cocofang said:

What happens when something is the best (in power and/or ease of use)? Everyone flocks towards it and uses it, ignoring everything that is weaker. This is a big part of what makes a meta. They develop in most games and they do so for a reason. Being that people generally want to play the best. Anecdotes to the contrary don't matter here, even the existence of this topic is proof of that.

If you ease orb restrictions on these cards, people will have more freedom to pick for their decks, that is very true. What happens when people have more freedom of choice there? They pick the best. So what you will end up with are decks that will be more homogeneous. Splashing will become even more powerful, even though it is are already very strong thanks to so many flexible cards. Pure decks will fall even further behind. Even duo-mixed decks will show noticeable wear.

Take the most stacked splash color of them all, nature. It offers Breeding Grounds, Curse of Oink, Revenge, Equilibrium, Thunderstorm, Grimvine, Giant Wyrm, Regrowth. Immediate, rock solid T4, sustain for all decks that can splash and powerful support. This is way too much bundled into a single orb. This shouldn't be accessible to pretty much any deck.

Reducing orb restrictions also severely hampers the concept of "faction identity". You immediately remove the notion that a card is supposed to be the apex of a faction.

No, what makes more sense to happen is:

1. Make weak cards that have harsh orb restrictions deliver more value
2. Make strong cards that are flexible deliver less value
3. Make strong cards that are flexible but should retain their power more restrictive

There have to be fitting opportunity costs for picking flexible or restrictive cards. Right now that is not the case and that is why especially nature splash or LSS are too powerful while the restrictive cards are not very popular.

Fully support that. All 3 points sound very good. (f.e. we could start by making Regrowth require 2 Nature instead of 1)

 

On 4/3/2021 at 3:05 PM, Cocofang said:

The goal should be to give a good reason to go for restrictive cards. Make them worth it. Make them the true pinnacle of their faction. While at the same time reevaluating just how powerful flexibility actually is and how much of a cards power budget a neutral orb requirement is really worth.

Indeed.

The biggest task here is to think of or even try out all still possible combinations of a certain card after the orb resctriction gets higher. 

[Ca7]

On 2/5/2021 at 1:21 AM, SunWu said:

I totally agree with you there. I have always wondered why some really strong cards have less restrictions than weaker cards that play the same role; overlord vs lost warlord, frenetic assault vs amok etc... reason is probably that the priority was having a nice theme going, therefor not so many splashable twilight, stonekin and lost cards (still doesn't explain spirit ship being splashable though)

Where i don't agree is making more PVE cards splashable, i already don't like how some decks dominate battlegrounds. Now make batariel and we have 40 batariels running around in every lvl 9 bg. I'd rather like to see some underplayed pure/theme PVE decks buffed carefully.

To that note, pure cards should be made as common as mixed shit, not only are pure decks harder (usually) they are also very unobtanium. (or something, wrote this after reading your post, but now after reading whole thread, I feel somewhat different about this IDK)