PDA

View Full Version : Potential issues with card balance and how fixes will be applied



Travis
05-12-2013, 09:38 PM
So it's been stated that what we open and collect during beta will not be taken away.

What if a a card is discovered during beta or afterwards and it is too strong? It is a Beta, so as players we should expect that there may be cards that need to be changed or taken out completely. Do you guys plan on banning cards, updating cards, downgrading cards? I only ask because of the potential for people to get upset. If a card is hot during beta because it is so strong people will begin trading for it and so on. If it is then altered after release or taken out their will be upset players that don't realize that it is for the betterment of the game to take it out or redo the card.

Altering the card seems better then banning it. After plating in several ccgs/mmos where equipment was nerfed and cards were banned, having and altered version was better then having nothing at all.

ShaolinRaven
05-12-2013, 09:41 PM
I would suspect that at least for Beta they would just alter the card. After Beta, who knows, I'm hoping for them to just fix the card since it is a digital game instead of a physical card game where you can't just alter the card and have to restrict or ban it.

Erebus
05-12-2013, 10:06 PM
http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=23000&page=3&p=206122#post206122

Post by OP_Kyle.

He claims that card errata by changing the text on a card is the last thing they want to do.

And the more I think about it, the more I think this is the appropriate response.

I know we all hate our favorite TCG card being banned, but it's probably not as bad as the MMO Nerfbat.

I'd rather the couple overpowered cards be banned (and thus still usable in casual) then to deal with weekly rewrites to my collection as Cryptozoic tries to "balance" the meta and FoTM decks.

Socks4615
05-12-2013, 10:20 PM
He also said, "Banning is also something on the table, but again, not something we would ever want to do." in the same post.



Changing the text on a card is the last thing we would want to do via errata, but it is an option on the table. Players will be chasing, purchasing, and will become attached to certain cards. Changing those cards is a terrible option. However, the overall health of the game for everyone is priority #1. Banning is also something on the table, but again, not something we would ever want to do. These would be on a case-by-case basis. Our priority is to make sure the balance of the game is tested a TON so we don't have to do either of these things and you have a sweet gameplay experience.

I think the "case-by-case basis" thing is the kicker there. Some cards they'll decide to ban rather than to muck with and some cards may be tinkered with. Given that their Fans/Players First attitude, they'll probably ask for community input for each card as it becomes a problem.

Erebus
05-12-2013, 10:24 PM
It's a big decision to ban a card from play entirely.

It's a much less difficult decision to errata a card. And each time you do, it makes it easier to justify the next or be pressured into it.

As far as taking feedback, I always find that the people who dislike something can be a lot more vocal then the people who like it or don't mind it. Lots of games are ruled by the vocal minority.

Socks4615
05-12-2013, 11:22 PM
As far as taking feedback, I always find that the people who dislike something can be a lot more vocal then the people who like it or don't mind it. Lots of games are ruled by the vocal minority.

This is absolutely true. I was told, during management training at one of my jobs, that if a person receives good service, they'll tell, on average, 4 people about it, but if they receive bad service, they'll tell 10. People always complain more than they compliment, that's true all over. So I try to step up and make my own voice heard. If we don't like the vocal minority getting all the attention, then it's up to us to make sure they're not the only ones doing the talking.

As for the rest, I'm just pointing out that it sounds like they haven't made up their minds or, if they have, they at least want to go case-by-case and not make a blanket "We will ban cards/we will errata cards" call (or at least, not make it now). What the plan is now and what ends up happening may not be exactly similar, of course.

Arrow
05-13-2013, 12:03 AM
I know we all hate our favorite TCG card being banned, but it's probably not as bad as the MMO Nerfbat.
This really isn't a very fair comparison. It sounds like you're saying that "people hate having their class nerfed in MMOs, so it would probably be better to ban their class altogether." I know this isn't what you meant to say, which is why the comparison doesn't really apply.

I'm personally not in favor of having cards banned. People can become attached to certain cards or combos, not to mention that they may have invested a lot of time/money into obtaining those cards. Of course, imbalances can and will happen. If a certain card/combo/deck becomes so powerful to the point that you either have to be playing that deck, or one specifically designed to counter it, then the competitive environment becomes stale and unfun - something obviously needs to be done in these situations. But by "nerfing" the problem cards in some way, you at least allow the people who invested in them the option to still play the way they want to, ideally in a more balanced environment.

Daer
05-13-2013, 01:25 AM
During beta by all means just balance the cards as needed.

At launch if a card needs to be banned or errata'd instead of just changing all the cards you could leave existing cards the same and change new cards only.

For example say a card is too powerful and needs to be banned, Card X. Internally all the cards will have an identifiable number. So you remove Card X from booster packs, maybe change its name to red text to show it has been banned, change its expansion from Shards of Fate to Banned (or Errata) so it shows up under a special section in your Card Collection. Then you produce a card with a new internal number with the changes needed to the card. Appearance wise it looks the same as the old card except for the balance changes needed. Add it to the booster pack generator.

So essentially you now have the banned card still available in your collection and still available for casual play, then you have the new card available in all boosters from that point on that can still be used in standard play.

You could do the same thing with all cards needing errata, spelling corrections, etc. That way you aren't changing anyone's card that they have already collected, you are just updating all future versions of that card.

This would be a last case scenario, of course in a perfect world a card wouldn't need to be banned or errata'd.

Erebus
05-13-2013, 01:26 AM
You criticize the comparison then make use of it in the next paragraph.

I'm not saying they'd ban the class, but choosing between banning the class or leaving as is, 90% of the time it's fine as is.

Also Errataing cards can have all the same effects of banning, if not worse. Your attached combo is too strong so they nerf one of the elements, and now it doesn't work. At least a banned combo still works when you want to pull it out in casual or PvE.

Or worse, your awesome card you love has been errataed/nerf into something that's next to worthless. Suddenly you hate that card you became attached to cause it's just another junk rare sitting in your card box (digital in this case).

I don't want to come in the game and find every week there's a dozen new erratas trying to "fix" the meta, and 100s of post asking for the devs to "fix" some other card.

My point is that performing an errata on a card should be treated with the same sanctity as potentially banning the card. Errata is a less permanent and easier solution, but can easily lead down a slippery slope.

A more balanced environment is obtained with a mature card set. That's why Magic hardly bans anything anymore in their Standard format anymore, because a) they are better able to tell what cards are potentially toxic and b) the cards don't stay around long. But this goes with putting cards out of print, which is a topic most people are on both sides of, and I'm not sure which side I'm on myself.

Erebus
05-13-2013, 01:27 AM
I also meant to say that this isn't just an TCG but it's also an MMO, and as groundbreaking as it might be, that also means it has the pitfalls of both.

Fireblast
05-13-2013, 02:15 AM
Some informations :
There will be 2 Beta phases
Closed Beta where you'll likely have all cards to test potentially broken combos
Reset
Open Beta where you can purchase boosters, it's basically a pre-launch

CZE guys implied that in some comments
I also think this is the right way to do it, without mentioning that closed beta players will be eager to buy boosters and find again the combos/decks they used to love during testing :)

Bans/Erratas
You have to remember this is a digital game, they'll have access to all the statistics they need, is winning the toss making you win the game? Is said card in 50% of the decks, etc...
They'll have so much data that they'll be able to balance the game with new sets and/or errata, but that shouldn't happen more than once every quarter

˜