Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Forming an Agenda
#11
Well, I have been working on this revitalization effort for about a week so far. Outlining an agenda, contacting players, drumming up support, seeking input, reaching consensus, etc. And, I'll put another week or two into it. But, if we can't convince the devs to invest just one day into these fixes, then the game is going die. So, let's hope they'll commit to at least that much. Even if they are unwilling to build out Highgrounds to its full potential, you would think they would want it to survive so they can count it amongst their titles if for no other reason. Plus, I take Scott at his word when he says that he also loves Highgrounds.

The exploits are ruining the game for everyone -- old and new players alike. You, too, would be winning more matches if these exploits were removed from the game. So, it's not a matter of this proposal only improving the experience for veteran players. And, I acknowledge that the handicap could use a little more tweaking, too. I am including under-utilized units in the proposal as an alternative to the infinitely more time consuming effort of creating new content from scratch. The devs have already put the time into creating those units, but they are adding no value to the game because no one uses them. Taking a few minutes to make changes that will unlock their value makes good business sense.

Highgrounds has been losing players for two years. As honest players become fed up and quit, the cheating has become more prevalent, which drives off more players -- the game is in a death spiral. You point out that from your perspective the only flaw is that there are not enough active players. Two years ago, that was not a problem. I am targeting the causes of this problem. The game will not remain viable much longer. These fixes must be made soon if Highgrounds is going to survive.
Never argue with a hobgoblin. It'll just amuse him more.
Reply
#12
(03-12-2017, 04:03 PM)LegendaryHobgoblin Wrote: 2) A design flaw that produces unintended consequences that can drastically skew the outcome of matches.
Example: Gamble

Gamble being buffable is probably intended. Not an exploit, but an overpowered strategy for a specific card. I'm sure Squire Gamble was used before Liege, and it wasn't overpowered.

Quote:Some have referenced Lanir as the root of the problem. I, however, disagree. This overlooks the squires as a secondary source of exploitation.

Squire Gamble is very limited: you can only put the gambler in the first few slots, and you need to match the enemy frontcount.

(03-17-2017, 04:06 PM)shmeffay Wrote: (Also, when we met in-game you talked to me about cheating, and I didn't get it. Two days ago I came across a player I'd never seen before, and on his first turn, when he should have had just 2 gold to spend, he launched units with a combined value of around 35 gold. By his second turn, with gold production of 3, he had all 10 units in place, able to finish the game. I guess that's what you meant about cheating!)

It's apparently not easy to fix, but there's a thread to report the person using that exploit.
Reply
#13
Well to say the true, I agree with Raijinili when it comes to gamble, it is not that easy to pull out, and did you know that the attack multiplier is apply AFTER taking defense in account? what i mean is that, let say that you put a gamble plus a 6 Attack squire that is 2 + 6 = 8 gamble attack, if there is a unit with let say 3 defense in front of him then this is how the attack counts: 2 + 6 - 3 (defense) = 5 gamble attack X 4 = a total of 20 attack. Ok that is a lot, but again it is not easy to pull that of.

Gamble over all it is basically "I gamble to make a win move or nothing"
Reply
#14
(03-21-2017, 12:45 AM)toorico Wrote: Well to say the true, I agree with Raijinili when it comes to gamble, it is not that easy to pull out, and did you know that the attack multiplier is apply AFTER taking defense in account? what i mean is that, let say that you put a gamble plus a 6 Attack squire that is 2 + 6 = 8 gamble attack, if there is a unit with let say 3 defense in front  of him then this is how the attack counts: 2 + 6 - 3 (defense) = 5 gamble attack X 4 = a total of 20 attack. Ok that is a lot, but again it is not easy to pull that of.

Gamble over all it is basically "I gamble to make a win move or nothing"

Yes, I realize defense is factored in before the multiplier. However, when gamble can be played in any of 7 slots, then defending against it isn't very practical. Raijinili brings up a good point, though. If squires become the primary means of buffing gamble, then that limits its use to the upper slots, thus making gamble a bit easier to block.

I get your angle "I gamble to make a win move or nothing". I think that is valid with Stucky. But, Flip doesn't vanish, so what ends up happening is players ubber buff him, then just wait for the inevitable round when he activates. That's not much of a "gamble".
Never argue with a hobgoblin. It'll just amuse him more.
Reply
#15
Yea, I can agree with that, actually the only reason that gamble have been truly a force to fear it is because of Fleep, super cheap, good producer (on early game) and yet make the +30 attack per success come true.
Reply
#16
(03-22-2017, 03:18 AM)toorico Wrote: Yea, I can agree with that, actually the only reason that gamble have been truly a force to fear it is because of Fleep, super cheap, good producer (on early game) and yet make the +30 attack per success come true.

EXACTLY!! We need to come up with a solution to this. I just assume replace Gamble with some other ability. If we don't replace gamble, then we need to nerf it.
Never argue with a hobgoblin. It'll just amuse him more.
Reply
#17
i sort of said it in my previous post. beating gamble using brute force or defend is not a good way cause u cant never beat them in term of attack power. the best way is to hurt their economy in the early game or if they manage to pull Flip out, use front wounding (rune is not that hard to hire compared to spike). i never though gamble is that OP anyway. as it is can be countered easily provided u have the right deck.
Reply
#18
I am genuinely seeking a player consensus on these fixes. This proposal is intended to represent the will of the Highgrounds community. So, I am pleased that we are engaging in a positive dialogue about these issues.

(03-19-2017, 05:03 PM)Raijinili Wrote: Gamble being buffable is probably intended. Not an exploit, but an overpowered strategy for a specific card. I'm sure Squire Gamble was used before Liege, and it wasn't overpowered.

Squire Gamble is very limited: you can only put the gambler in the first few slots, and you need to match the enemy frontcount.

Honestly, I'd prefer to simply replace gamble with another ability, and be done with it. But, I'm getting the impression that you guys want to keep gamble. Is that right? If we don't replace it, then we need to balance it.

I am intrigued with the point you made of squires being slightly more limited than liege in the sense that they can only be played in the top half of the field. But, squire+gamble would still produce an imbalanced amount of attack.

Let's compare the gamble issue to a comparable wood scenario. I choose wood because the devs made clear in the tutorial that the very reason why the wood faction exists is to give players the option of implementing a style of play that quickly produces large, powerful armies but at the expense of safety. So, gold and crystal decks should not grow as quickly as wood because they have the advantage of being far more resilient than wood. This is the clear intent of the developers.

A pair of Flips (cost 4) and a pair of Covars (cost 8) would produce 56 attack points when triggered. Plus, the Covars would produce 4 additional gold every turn!
A pair of Fengs (cost 3) and a pair of Elteriges (cost 8) would produce 32 attack points. And could be wiped out by a single strike from a multi-wounder.

So, even after we take Lanir out of the equation, gamble is still far too powerful for its price. How should we go about fixing this problem? As I said, I just assume replace gamble -- Flip and Stucky would simply perform some other function on the front row. Otherwise, we need to do something with Lanir and also reduce gamble. So, if we don't replace gamble then perhaps a solution would be to reduce gamble to a '2' multiplier. Rampage uses a '2' multiplier, and players use rampage effectively all the time. In fact, I would argue that gamble would still be more effective than rampage, because rampage can always be avoided by simply filling up the front row. There is no way to avoid gamble. It catches you sooner or later.

A pair of Flips (with a '2' multiplier) and a pair of Covars would produce 28 attack points when triggered. Plus, the Covars would still produce 4 additional gold every turn.

So, the hypothetical wood army would produce 4 more attack (but would be far more fragile than the gold army). And, would not receive any additional resources from the wolves. That seems much more balanced and reasonable.

What do you guys think? Replace gamble with something else? Or reduce it to a '2' multiplier?
Never argue with a hobgoblin. It'll just amuse him more.
Reply
#19
you know what guys, I think that if we keep this up... we could, just may be.... could be..... a place were in the future, Scott could take this a recollected data for the future fix! XD
Reply
#20
(03-23-2017, 02:11 AM)toorico Wrote: you know what guys, I think that if we keep this up... we could, just may be.... could be..... a place were in the future, Scott could take this a recollected data for the future fix! XD

Agreed. I had hope that a fix could be made rather easily. I was of course unaware of server code compatibility issues. But there is no harm in continuing this discussion...hammering out consensus solutions to the issues of the game that exist in its current state...mentally projecting our concept of the "ideal" player approved version of Highgrounds. And, who knows. Perhaps one day that dream will be realized. Scott did leave the door open to that possibility.
Never argue with a hobgoblin. It'll just amuse him more.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)