PDA

View Full Version : How important is having the option to bluff?



Gwaer
11-15-2013, 05:08 PM
I've been thinking about these stack changes and the reasons it was implemented, the biggest one seems to be the pacing of the game. I've been in favor of a toggleable option that let you decide if you wanted to just skip all priorities you couldn't react to for either an action, phase, or turn. But would the game lose as much as it is now if that wasn't toggleable? What if all priorities you couldn't react to were autopassed, would losing the ability to pretend you had a response mess with the game as much as not being able to use your quick actions to deal with triggered effects? Could we try just giving up our ability to bluff instead for a while and see how it goes? That's a change that actually can be pretty easily reverted later on by adding a toggle to turn it off without fundamentally changing the cards.

Lawlschool
11-15-2013, 05:29 PM
What if all priorities you couldn't react to were autopassed, would losing the ability to pretend you had a response mess with the game as much as not being able to use your quick actions to deal with triggered effects?

It's my understanding that they removed the response to triggered effects in particular because those were effects very few, if any, people responded too. Any changes to the game overall should be minor or niche. Autopassing when you have nothing to play would be significantly more detrimental, since that actually impacts bluffing. Autopassing essentially reveals your hand; if the game autopasses your priority on your opponent's turn, he knows you don't have a quickaction, meaning he knows you can't answer anything that turn. Likewise, if it doesn't autopass, he knows you do have a quickaction and knows you could answer one of his plays (assuming you have resources available). That knowledge can easily make or break a turn, and would undoubtedly harm gameplay.

Gwaer
11-15-2013, 05:32 PM
However, that is not true, there are a great many times that you respond to triggered abilities, like pretty much every time a paladin is played with a scrivener, or buffing the troop a squirrel titan is attacking.

Bluffing in my opinion is great and rewarding and I pretty much always hold back a card and some resources to pretend like I have answers, but one could just as easily spam space to bluff not having an answer as holding one back, the nature of bluffing may change, but even if it weren't allowed at all would all that many game outcomes change? I bet not. It would also keep the game intuitive for new players, as by default it would only stop when you could take an action.

Gwaer
11-15-2013, 05:36 PM
I suppose I should clarify, I'm not saying this is the ideal option, I'm saying if you had to pick one or the other, would you split up the stack effects into triggered/combat damage, and everything else. Or would you accept not being able to bluff.

The pro's and con's seem obvious to me and heavily in favor of ditching bluffing at least for a while, but I am interested in hearing about it from the other side.

hammer
11-15-2013, 05:56 PM
I think bluffing and providing imperfect information to your opponent is very important for the deep strategy of the game and is a skill differentiator, therefore I cannot support this.

Gwaer
11-15-2013, 05:57 PM
I agree with you hammer. It is very important, but so is having the ability to respond to effects with the stack.

hammer
11-15-2013, 05:59 PM
The two seem mutally exclusive. I have posted my solution for the stack issue in the patch notes would love to hear thoughts from others.

Vorpal
11-15-2013, 06:36 PM
I think as long as you have a card in your hand you can be considered to be bluffing. I'm fine with the game auto passing for me if there is nothing I can do.

I doubt my opponent will be able to tell if I pressed space really quickly or if the computer did it for me.

I think I would prefer auto-passing if you can't do anything over the new trigger change.

negativeZer0
11-15-2013, 06:45 PM
I've been in favor of a toggleable option that let you decide if you wanted to just skip all priorities you couldn't react to for either an action, phase, or turn.

There should be a casual mode (we can call it something else so it doesn't seem demeaning but that's not important now).
This mode is ALWAYS on in ALL non-ranked games.
In ranked games it is player preference.

Always on in non-ranked games is one of the biggest points here because the opponent is not forced to sit through Bluffs and makes the game more enjoyable for people looking for quick fun games. This greatly improves the "casual" players experience without forcing a change on high ranked tournament style players.

The new trigger change is by far the worst of a long list of possible ways to fix the priority issue which is minor at best.

Gwaer
11-15-2013, 07:18 PM
That's a good take on it, I hadn't thought of a casual game situation having one setting and tournaments having another.

noragar
11-15-2013, 08:13 PM
I'd be 100% in favor of setting up the auto-pass like that and have suggested it in a few different threads over the months.

I also like the casual vs. tournament split suggested above (maybe not for all tournaments, but at least the major more serious ones).

Malakili
11-15-2013, 08:28 PM
All you need to do is look at how the game plays right now to see how bad an idea this would be. Everything is 100% sure to go through right now (no countermagic, no stoneskin). All spells are freely cast with no worry. It's terrible.

Now just imagine that your opponent gets that same information for free when such cards ARE implemented. It's huge. HUGE.

Frankly, all this hemming and hawing over passing priority is mind boggling to me. I mean this entirely seriously: Is it really that big a deal for people to hit the space bar? There is far more time spent sending the cards to the stack because of the shitty animation than the actual passing of priority, turn off the animations rather than screwing with the gameplay, if we REALLY have to worry about tightening up the amount of time the games take

Gwaer
11-15-2013, 08:32 PM
It is a big deal to new players, there's a valid thing here they're trying to fix. The game depends on a thriving pve community and if it they get turned off by pass priority before they have a chance to grasp how important it is that can be bad.

I hit spacebar constantly as it is, whether I have an answer or not is not an easy thing to determine even now, if it auto passes but still shows up on the stack, and goes through the motions telling if someone is spamming space or has no answer is not going to be perfect knowledge.

Malakili
11-15-2013, 08:39 PM
Apparently I just can't grasp the mind of a person who is "turned off by pass priority." Seriously, all they need to do is stick one line in the tutorial that says something like

"You get priority - the ability to play a quick action, or use an ability - whenever something happens to ensure you can react to the changing conditions of the game! You'll get this even when you don't have a card to play to ensure your opponent can't guess what cards you have in your hand!"

BOOM DONE. If someone doesn't have the patience for that, BY ALL MEANS GO PLAY HEARTHSTONE.

Erep
11-15-2013, 08:51 PM
Just to go back to the original point about having no option to bluff. The problem would not be that you can't do complex moves.

If there is no option to bluff, players will start doing suboptimal plays just to figure out what is in their opponents hand. For example, before playing Life Siphon against Sapphire, you would always a different card in order to see if the opponent gets the option to respond. If they don't, you know there is no counterspell, and you can go through with the play safely, investing all resources to win, in situations where that would otherwise be risky.

Also, as for my view on the pass priority thing, I think the game just needs to be more responsive, with basically zero animation time, and server delay, and it should be fine.

Gwaer
11-15-2013, 08:52 PM
Card advantage to test an ability? Yes please. That's a fine trade off IMO.

Malakili
11-15-2013, 08:55 PM
Card advantage to test an ability? Yes please. That's a fine trade off IMO.

Or, you know, just leave the game like it was and include plenty of options for auto-passing priority in certain situations like Magic Online does rather than fundamentally changing the way the game plays.

If this was truly the only way to address this problem and the overwhelming majority of people seemed to want to address the problem, then maybe I could grit my teeth and deal with it. But the fact is we have a perfectly working model already out there.

Gwaer
11-15-2013, 09:00 PM
Mtgo is far from perfectly working. You and I will never agree on the necessity of something to make the game more approachable and interesting for a new audience. If for whatever reason they cannot implement the mtgo option and something does have to be done to make the game more approachable, what then would your solution be?

Malakili
11-15-2013, 09:05 PM
Mtgo is far from perfectly working. You and I will never agree on the necessity of something to make the game more approachable and interesting for a new audience. If for whatever reason they cannot implement the mtgo option and something does have to be done to make the game more approachable, what then would your solution be?

Raise a generation of children with an attention span longer than my cats.

Erep
11-15-2013, 09:08 PM
I mean, a simple solution would be to set the default to skip whenever you don't have a legal play (as you suggest), which any player playing at a level capable of abusing feature as I suggest, will know to turn off some of the filters, so people can't do what I suggested against Counterspell against them.

Gwaer
11-15-2013, 09:17 PM
Raise a generation of children with an attention span longer than my cats.
Oh god, please don't breed, anything but that.

noragar
11-15-2013, 09:59 PM
Online, the amount of time it takes to respond isn't even that reliable of a tell. If there's a pause, you don't know whether it was because they have a quick action or if it was because of server lag or internet traffic. If there's no pause, you don't know whether it was because they have no quick action or because they were spamming the spacebar.

madar
11-16-2013, 03:06 AM
I think the autopass is a good thing, i dont care much if you know i am bluffing or not, or - terrible, horrible, very bad - i dont care if you bluffing or not. Yea, i played MTG 15-20 years ago, but i can look out from my box and can realize not every match is go for blood and will change the world. We will see who have longer attention span when you meet with a mass of the new players who all spend 3-4 seconds above every pass cos trying to figure out whats up, or didnt notice he have to respond cos he waiting for your actions (cos is your turn), or didnt notice he have to respond cos he trying to figure out what his card doing - cos he can do free in your turn when you are busy and he don't disturb you.
Maybe not only pro players will play this game who know all cards, and already played the entire match in head in the turn1...

The toggle its a good idea, only to tournament, or a checkbox "i am pro i want to bluff lol", but only if the default option is on autopass, else even the pro players will have an attention span test in a lot of game.

madar
11-16-2013, 03:27 AM
and, btw, another thing: how much the software should help for me to play?
If it's stop only when i can do something, it's not only about the bluff, it's a notice that i shouldn't forget that i have a card what now can be used... if i have to pass all the time, maybe i forget it, and just pressing space like a droid. If there is stop at every time cos bluff, the client can tell me if is real stop or bluff stop only, so noob player can realize there is nothing to do, only deep strategy, but is it good? To help for the player?
If there is a stop and there is an usable action, is it good to highlight the usable actions, so the noob will realize there is a troop ability to use, or will spend 10 sec to figure out why we stopped?
Do we want to bluff against the AI too btw?

Malakili
11-16-2013, 06:10 AM
The bottom line is that this fundamentally changes the amount of information a player has to work with about what their opponent as in their hand. No matter what you say about newbies, or people who get distracted by a shiny object on their desk, or whatever - this would change how the game works in a very important way and "well people don't want to click pass priority too many times" isn't really justification for such a change.

While we're at it, baseball takes a really long time to play, maybe the pitcher should just have to throw fastballs every time to speed up the time in between pitches. Or better yet, let's remove the pitcher all together and just put in one of those machines from the batting cages.

keroko
11-16-2013, 07:40 AM
Undeniable loss of player control / ability to bluff.

Someone mentioned quick actions that can be used to counter abilities - guess that's 'too complicated'?

Ease of use angle appreciable; overall game filtered with comparison to the given standard for stack and it's control.

Assume some technical reason for this?

It's rules dilution / simplification.

Personally disagree with this change, vehemently.

noragar
11-16-2013, 07:40 AM
The bottom line is that this fundamentally changes the amount of information a player has to work with about what their opponent as in their hand. No matter what you say about newbies, or people who get distracted by a shiny object on their desk, or whatever - this would change how the game works in a very important way and "well people don't want to click pass priority too many times" isn't really justification for such a change.

While we're at it, baseball takes a really long time to play, maybe the pitcher should just have to throw fastballs every time to speed up the time in between pitches. Or better yet, let's remove the pitcher all together and just put in one of those machines from the batting cages.

If changes are going to upset you this much, then maybe you shouldn't be playing in the early alpha stages and should wait until the game is released. I expect there will be plenty more changes between now and then.

As far as your baseball analogy, it would be more like speeding up the game by enforcing a time limit for the pitcher to pitch the ball because the pitcher wants to stall so that the batter doesn't know whether he has a ball in his hand or not.

Malakili
11-16-2013, 08:43 AM
If changes are going to upset you this much, then maybe you shouldn't be playing in the early alpha stages and should wait until the game is released. I expect there will be plenty more changes between now and then.


Changes don't bother me. Bad changes bother me.

EDIT: We were pitched a game that was essentially Magic: The Gathering designed for a digital space. That was pretty much *the* reason there was so much hype surrounding this kickstarter in the first place. Doing things which move away from the fundamental mechanics which make that game great is troubling.

jetah
11-16-2013, 06:54 PM
So this effects the whole lot of players.

Can we have the option to tell the game what type of player we are:
never played TCG (i'm new)
played some (i've some experience)
play a lot (i've entered tournaments)
i'm secretly living in CZE basement (in yo base stealing yo tp)

After telling which type of player you are, the system can determine if you need auto pass or not. You'll still get the option to toggle it in the options.

MugenMusou
11-17-2013, 12:08 PM
I think "stop priority" approach by default is the best option without a change in gameplay. I am one of the player preferred no change in trigger chain. Just as other mentioned here, I saw this game has potential to do anything that Magic can do and perhaps more (being digital dedicated game). But this change will takes away the potential.

Here are couple scenarios that I put on my blog, but I am sure many more out there. http://houshasen.wordpress.com/2013/11/17/%E3%80%90hex%E3%80%91evolution-or-regression-change-in-chain-mechanics/

The idea of stop priority approach is basically by default 5 seconds timer is set to pass the priority. So if one wants to react to it, that's when one needs to click the button. Otherwise, the priority is automatically passed after 5 seconds (may be shorter).

Since majority of time we are "passing" rather than "stopping", I think this will take away many clicks. Obviously, multiple chain will result in 5 x X seconds wait in the game, so that may be an issue depending on how long the timer is set to.

But if multiple event happens based on a single trigger, then those can be combined as one before the pass priority triggers. I.e. 2 adamanthian will create chain entries at once then each player gains pass priority instead of 1 for each.

As far as the opener's question of "bluffing", I think automatic pass when you don't have card is NOT a good idea. I thought about this hard while back when I was writing article about other dTCGs why they aren't using instant like system. But leaving resources unused are important part of play in certain deck types like Draw Go/Permission. HEX has capability to support this deck type well, so if you lose the "bluff" power, the whole deck's concept fails.

I can cast a 1 cost troop to probe whether he has potential way to counter it e.g. Murder. If I see he doesn't because of autopass, I then can cast a bigger troop without a worry. Again, takes away the Draw Go/Permission player's strategy there.

Hieronymous
11-18-2013, 09:57 AM
They could add a 1-3 second random delay on the auto-pass option, plus an onscreen toggle, and play would be virtually unchanged except we'd all have to click less.

Soldack
11-18-2013, 10:36 AM
They could add a 1-3 second random delay on the auto-pass option, plus an onscreen toggle, and play would be virtually unchanged except we'd all have to click less.

This is what I consider the best solution!

Hieronymous
11-18-2013, 12:09 PM
This is what I consider the best solution!

It probably is. Unfortunately it probably will take a while to implement just due to the need for the requisite UI changes and artwork etc.

Disordia
11-18-2013, 12:14 PM
I think following mtgo's solution to these issues is by far the best solution offered so far, which I went into further detail in the stickied thread discussion about this.

Turtlewing
11-18-2013, 12:34 PM
I'm with Gware on this one.

The ability to respond to triggered effects is more valuable than the ability to pretend you have a response when you don't.

You can still bluff by holding a response that isn't useful at this time (you could give your opponent's trop +2/+2, but you're not going to).

Also bluffing doesn't really work on players at the low and high end of the scale. It only woks when your opponent is at that sweet spot where they can imagine a counter to what they're planning and paranoid enough to change their behavior because you might have it.

noragar
11-18-2013, 12:51 PM
It probably is. Unfortunately it probably will take a while to implement just due to the need for the requisite UI changes and artwork etc.

Agreed that this is the best solution. But what artwork would need to change?

The UI shouldn't need major changes either since it's already programmed in such a way to identify and highlight cards that can currently be played. If there are no such cards, then start the timer and auto-pass.

Hieronymous
11-18-2013, 01:33 PM
Agreed that this is the best solution. But what artwork would need to change?

The UI shouldn't need major changes either since it's already programmed in such a way to identify and highlight cards that can currently be played. If there are no such cards, then start the timer and auto-pass.

If nothing else, they'd need to add in on-screen buttons to toggle auto-pass on and off. Depending on how intricate they want to make that interface it could require a whole UI redesign.

Yoss
11-18-2013, 05:17 PM
I've been thinking about these stack changes and the reasons it was implemented, the biggest one seems to be the pacing of the game. I've been in favor of a toggleable option that let you decide if you wanted to just skip all priorities you couldn't react to for either an action, phase, or turn. But would the game lose as much as it is now if that wasn't toggleable? What if all priorities you couldn't react to were autopassed, would losing the ability to pretend you had a response mess with the game as much as not being able to use your quick actions to deal with triggered effects? Could we try just giving up our ability to bluff instead for a while and see how it goes? That's a change that actually can be pretty easily reverted later on by adding a toggle to turn it off without fundamentally changing the cards.

Totally agree. I'd much, much rather give up bluffing (for now, during testing) than dumb down the game. However, what if I DO have a Quick in hand, but there are many things I don't care to respond to? We still need to tackle selective, configurable, auto-passing.

Glide
11-20-2013, 07:20 AM
I'm really concerned about the inability to respond to triggered abilities. Even if there aren't any cards in now that this change is relevant to, it changes, and most importantly limits, how cards can be designed in the future. Cards that trigger when something enters the stack almost can't be made now, because in such a scenario there's absolutely no counter play involved. There can also never be interrupts that target abilities, because abilities will never be on the stack to target.

The change to the current game state, and the collection of set 1 cards that are available? Relatively minor. The change to the future of the game however, is huge.