gabe
Elder Immortal
"I will not forget this..."
Posts: 280
|
Post by gabe on Jan 25, 2019 14:22:56 GMT -5
When you get down to brass tacks, the game is supposed to mimic the battle between two immortals. Bringing their life experience, skill and tactics against their opponent in a duel to the death.
At the same time, this is a card game, and as such we need to realize that some strategies are superior to others. This I am fine with, but via personal conversations with Steve Rice over the last few years, I was made aware of a concerted effort. An effort to encourage Defense and outlasting your opponent until Endgame. This, I have dubbed "Turtling".
The reason I was given, is that "nobody likes to take damage".
The result is that Endgame becomes so boring and drags out tournaments, encouraging decks that lockdown your opponent. Wouldn't more offense improve the game? I envision a constant back and forth where players are at least hitting each other and ending a match within regulation time. Victories would then reward good deck construction and fewer play mistakes.
Because right now, deck construction involves: 1. Maximize my defense so I don't get hit. 2. How many counter/nullification effects can I cram in. 3. How can I prevent/lockdown my opponent from defending x.
For doing so, you don't get hit much, get to see more of your deck, and eventually win just because you have more power cards or lockdown cards.
|
|
|
Post by zogfhyr on Jan 25, 2019 15:26:57 GMT -5
Are you saying the effirt was to design cards to aid turtles, or the deck design from players was leaning that way? I see both occurring. I like to lockdown and do things in odd ways, not just standard attacking, so I know I am at fault as well. I would love a new edition, or a tournament play style that keeps the core of the game in mind. Like making the turtle cards unavailable, like Brother Paul's plot as an example. It would be annoying for new players, but I would support a ban list for a specific format like that.
|
|
gabe
Elder Immortal
"I will not forget this..."
Posts: 280
|
Post by gabe on Jan 25, 2019 16:54:01 GMT -5
The effort was (from Steve Rice, being the whole design team at that time) to design defensive cards that make it hard for attacks to succeed. I have a problem when not every strategy is equally supported.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jan 25, 2019 19:20:49 GMT -5
The effort was (from Steve Rice, being the whole design team at that time) to design defensive cards that make it hard for attacks to succeed. I have a problem when not every strategy is equally supported. Thats your opinion. And you know what you can do with it
|
|
|
Post by zogfhyr on Jan 25, 2019 22:26:18 GMT -5
Can we try to not attack people? Only Immortals should be attacked.
|
|
|
Post by Heel Santa on Jan 26, 2019 2:09:37 GMT -5
When you get down to brass tacks, the game is supposed to mimic the battle between two immortals. Bringing their life experience, skill and tactics against their opponent in a duel to the death. At the same time, this is a card game, and as such we need to realize that some strategies are superior to others. This I am fine with, but via personal conversations with Steve Rice over the last few years, I was made aware of a concerted effort. An effort to encourage Defense and outlasting your opponent until Endgame. This, I have dubbed "Turtling". The reason I was given, is that "nobody likes to take damage". The result is that Endgame becomes so boring and drags out tournaments, encouraging decks that lockdown your opponent. Wouldn't more offense improve the game? I envision a constant back and forth where players are at least hitting each other and ending a match within regulation time. Victories would then reward good deck construction and fewer play mistakes. Because right now, deck construction involves: 1. Maximize my defense so I don't get hit. 2. How many counter/nullification effects can I cram in. 3. How can I prevent/lockdown my opponent from defending x. For doing so, you don't get hit much, get to see more of your deck, and eventually win just because you have more power cards or lockdown cards. I'm not understanding what you're laying down? Are you asking a question? Making a statement? Ranting? Venting? Not liking the fact that a (by all practical purposes)dead game few people have hung onto has been kept alive by a smaller handful of people like prowler7 and headswillroll so we can still play the game? Those guys spent more hours designing and testing than most large game companies. Just don't get the meaning behind this post. Just talking to be heard? Seriously. I don't like all cards or all immortals but I do one of a couple of things. Don't buy/play that immortal or find away around the "broken" stuff. Play, have fun or don't play.
|
|
|
Post by dragothebreaker on Jan 26, 2019 9:19:41 GMT -5
Are you saying more aggressive decks/cards need to be part of the game?
If so understand your comment and would point to what happened at the last major tournament. Most victories where by head shots. While I played Amanda lock down another Amanda deck had a 100% kill rate on every one out me and only because I had the one card that would stop it (Amanda’s master dodge)
Lean and mean - 1st and 2nd place where head hunters Type 1 - Ducan head hunter (granted that one had control as well)
The addition of the new New York location also adds to aggression
There is some concern about being locked down to fast/ability to get out of it. Would note the card concentration is useful and cycles well with aggression decks.
ALLOT of combos due to allot of cards. Perhaps seasons (verse, season 1-4, endgame) I don’t know a suggestion. In Hearthstone and magic they have something of rotation- but old cards become no longer playable (not advocating that - but could be out one season in the next)
The aggression/combo decks are out there - as are lock down
For your consideration,
|
|
gabe
Elder Immortal
"I will not forget this..."
Posts: 280
|
Post by gabe on Jan 27, 2019 17:07:02 GMT -5
The point is to ask how we want game play to look and feel like? I was also sharing WHY the current state of game play is horrible, when compared to other card games out there.
Should it be a back and forth exchange of attack damage until one Immortal wins...
-or-
A slow game of countering/nullifying until a lucky headshot lands, or endgame drags the match further.
|
|
|
Post by Heel Santa on Jan 27, 2019 18:54:12 GMT -5
The point is to ask how we want game play to look and feel like? I was also sharing WHY the current state of game play is horrible, when compared to other card games out there. Should it be a back and forth exchange of attack damage until one Immortal wins... -or- A slow game of countering/nullifying until a lucky headshot lands, or endgame drags the match further. Unfortunate that you felt it necessary to share your OPINION( AND ONLY AN OPINION) of the game is that the game play is horrible. We just had a two person tourney that was a chess match. Attack+a little stall. Super fun nail biter of a game. We still feel it's the best game mechanic out there and the feel of the game has not diminished. Now I'm sharing my opinion. Isn't sharing fun!
|
|
gabe
Elder Immortal
"I will not forget this..."
Posts: 280
|
Post by gabe on Jan 27, 2019 20:20:26 GMT -5
Really!? To gauge the current state of "game play" based on a two person tournament. Is literally like judging a book by its cover. BTW- a two Person tournament, is NOT a tournament. I'm glad you had a good match, but trying to invalidate my observation of the game and dismissing it as mere opinion is childish.
|
|
|
Post by Heel Santa on Jan 27, 2019 22:26:55 GMT -5
ha!
o·pin·ion /əˈpinyən/Submit noun a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by kurganfan on Jan 27, 2019 22:57:04 GMT -5
I must disagree wholly with Jeff on one thing. I have literally nothing to do but Highlander, I'm old and retired and a little boring, and I still didn't have a new deck for today. My bad.
|
|
|
Post by kurganfan on Jan 27, 2019 23:00:46 GMT -5
BTW, again we should acknowledge the work of Steve and Jim Black. Without them we wouldn't be arguing these points, and I'm guessing they didn't get rich off Highlander.
|
|
|
Post by zogfhyr on Jan 28, 2019 7:49:19 GMT -5
All of this is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by prowler7 on Jan 28, 2019 11:42:27 GMT -5
BTW, again we should acknowledge the work of Steve and Jim Black. Without them we wouldn't be arguing these points, and I'm guessing they didn't get rich off Highlander. We did it all for free
|
|