PDA

View Full Version : Troop regeneration/healing



Greel
04-27-2014, 07:43 AM
I don't like like it.

I'm put off slightly, for a few reasons, by the fact that every turn all troops auto heal completely.

Take the following scenario. I have a Paladin of Naagaan (3/5) in play and my opponent has a Crazed Squirrel Titan out (4/4). Because troops auto heal every turn this is a stalemate situation. The Squirrel will never kill the Paladin and the Paladin will never kill the Squirrel. With out the assistance of actions, this game could go on for a thousand turns and never see any progress. If however troops did not auto heal every turn this scenario would go somewhere. Turn two the defender needs to make a choice, do I let the damage through or do I sacrifice my troop for his (as both would receive fatal damage in the second round of combat).

More importantly, if troops did not auto heal, if would open the floor up to a new Heal ability (aka regeneration from MTG), which would allow for more depth and strategy. You could have troops with a heal ability, actions that heal, actions that heal everything and champions that heal. You wouldn't be able to just blindly defend against smaller troops forever (like in the above example).

I would be curious to know if others feel the same, or if everyone is fine with troops auto healing to full every turn.

If a regenerate/heal ability ever wants to be added to the game, this is a change that would need to go in ASAP, as it is a fundamental change in the way combat works, and once fully released, would be far to big a change in my opinion to throw at people.

Marsden
04-27-2014, 07:47 AM
...not sure if serious :confused:

You bring up MTG Regeneration as an example, but MTG treats creatures in the same way as Hex.

Personally, this is the only way I like creatures to work. I've avoided playing TCGs with ongoing creature damage because I really don't like it.

Kami
04-27-2014, 07:53 AM
You have to think of each 'battle phase' as a separate battlefield. You're fighting to win a war against your opponent, not a single battle.

The reason they are restored to full (unless stated otherwise by permanent effects) is because after the battle, they rest and recuperate, before going to yet another battlefield.

Games that have on-going damage/effects by mechanic (i.e. not permanent effects) are usually thought of as a single battle that's on-going. Your troops don't have time to rest and recuperate because they're in the thick of it. They either survive to the end of the 'battle' or they die. This would be akin to having the fight last on a single battlefield. It's not a war, it's just a fight.

Xenavire
04-27-2014, 08:00 AM
I just want to put it out there, that this game does not mirror WoWTCG or Hearthstone with damage. The idea is to have damage be reset at the end of a turn, and there are balance implications (like attack/defence balancing, and more.)

DanTheMeek
04-27-2014, 08:28 AM
It's not uncommon in Hex to have the very sort of stalemate situation the TC suggests, as the combat style is largely a recreation of MTG's, which also had this "issue", games can and will drag on some times when neither player can effectively push past. Throw in a large defenders advantage do to the defenders ability to decide what blocks what, and even when one player has a stronger troop then the other its not uncommon to see lots of turn passing occur as its often still better to keep that troop available for defending then pushing through a little damage.

But that's just the style of combat CZE chose. Every style of combat has its advantages and issues. While I will grant you that digital games do have the ability to negate one of the issues with persistent damage by keeping track of it for you with out the need for counters, I don't personally feel persistent damage is inherently superior to turn based regeneration, just different. In fact, I'd actually argue that I some times feel like too many DTCGs use the persistent damage style too often simply because they know they CAN handle it for the player, but just because you can do something doesn't always mean you should.

I'm with some of the other posters in this thread in that I've tended to prefer games that didn't have persistent damage, but that doesn't make this style better, its just my own preference as games with persistent damage are yours Greel. I can say, however, that at this stage in the games development the odds of the entire game being changed to facilitate persistent damage (which would require the rebalance of every card in the set) is probably less then 0.00001%. In other words, while we'd hope you've give Hex's system a chance, if the lack of persistent damage truly is a deal breaker for you, then Hex probably isn't the game for you and probably never will be.

Greel
04-27-2014, 08:33 AM
You bring up MTG Regeneration as an example, but MTG treats creatures in the same way as Hex.

I must confess it's been a good 10 years or so since I played Magic (and way back then our understanding of some mechanics was laughably inaccurate, and I guess still are), so I guess I was not aware that creatures in magic auto-regenerated every turn.



You have to think of each 'battle phase' as a separate battlefield. You're fighting to win a war against your opponent, not a single battle.

I never really got the feeling/impression that each round of combat was an entirely different battle (are our troops and theirs just chasing each other around the world?)

I'm still not a huge fan of it, and I would at the very least like to see something like a troop needs to not take damage for a round to fully heal, or maybe heals 1 health every turn. It's by no means a deal breaker, just something that feels weird to me.

cferejohn
04-27-2014, 08:45 AM
The appeal of Hex to many (including me) is that it's essentially Magic but a) Half-price and b) with some more design space due to not being constrained to physical cards. Changing something as fundamental as how creatures heal would be a big turn off for us. I realize that doesn't matter to the many non-Magic players who play the game.

It could be a cool (and an example of that increased design space) to create a creature that did heal as you describe as a disadvantage (or caused creatures it damaged to heal as you described as an advantage).

Barkam
04-27-2014, 08:45 AM
The game is balanced around trips healing at the end of each round. Just the way the game is. It works very well. The game is not going to change in this regard. Best to learn how to thrive in (your perspective) new s strategic paradigm. Good luck and enjoy the game.

Revoluketion
04-27-2014, 08:45 AM
I am personally not a fan of permanent health loss In card games..whether that be because I have for the most part only played games with resetting health or not, that is just what I prefer. My biggest concern is that when health is taken away permanently, it takes away from other card effects like actions that remove or burn because hey my troops can do all the lifting. Ultimately in a game like Hex if troops were to keep their health loss a lot of cards would lose value.. i.e. burn, sappers charge, bomb smith and the like.. though the value lost varies there is no argument that their usefulness in situations dwindles with your proposed change.

Those are my thoughts on the matter :) hope they made sense!

Rxauin
04-27-2014, 08:48 AM
To each his own. I prefer games like this. You might want to check out Hearthstone (if you havent already). I'd stop playing hex (and be very sad) if damage became permanent.

MasterN64
04-27-2014, 09:26 AM
Having played hearthstone i am not fond of permanent damage. It tends to lend itself to a simple swing with everything every turn kind of mentality since its so easy to lose minions. It also puts a huge bias towards direct damage abilities and return from death mechanics.

Kami
04-27-2014, 10:10 AM
Having played hearthstone i am not fond of permanent damage. It tends to lend itself to a simple swing with everything every turn kind of mentality since its so easy to lose minions. It also puts a huge bias towards direct damage abilities and return from death mechanics.

It's a different kind of mindset. For permanent damage games, it's more a battle of attrition than it is about end-game strategy. It's very tactical as opposed to strategic.

ossuary
04-27-2014, 12:12 PM
I hate games with permanent damage, personally. I've never liked the idea of a series of 1/1 rabbits eventually killing a 12/12 behemoth. I'm very glad Hex works the way it does in this regard. :p

DreamPuppet
04-27-2014, 02:26 PM
Since nobody has offered yet. I'll trade you my hearthstone account for your Hex account, this doesnt sound like your game.

ZacPhoenix
04-27-2014, 02:38 PM
HEX is 99% Magic the Gathering. That other 1% is the digital effects that Magic is incapable of. Everything else is nearly identical.

Kami
04-27-2014, 02:46 PM
HEX is 99% Magic the Gathering. That other 1% is the digital effects that Magic is incapable of. Everything else is nearly identical.

I'd say the difference is much larger than 1%. The fact that HEX uses a threshold system as opposed to mana system is already significantly different.

For example, in Magic, you would need 4 Islands to cast two spells at UU cost each.

In HEX, you would just need 2 Sapphire and 2 Any resources to cast two spells that have a threshold of SS but 2 resource cost each.

Deathfog
04-27-2014, 04:53 PM
Regeneration, aka pay mana/etc to bring a destroyed creature back to life tapped, isn't really a factor in Hex so far. Hopefully it will never become prevalent due to the differences in colored mana counts vs. threshold. A 1/1 for 2 mana/1 blood that comes back for a mere 1 mana every turn would be a bit more powerful than requiring 1 Black in MtG.

incitfulmonk21
04-27-2014, 05:08 PM
I actually like both types of games but as mentioned they do play completely different from each other. Maybe there is even design space for a dungeon or format where damage is permanent.

I hope you know the community in general understands how you feel agree or disagree but, at this time to change how things work at the base level just isn't practical and would change the game we have been playing up to this point.

Simo46
04-27-2014, 08:11 PM
It's a different kind of mindset. For permanent damage games, it's more a battle of attrition than it is about end-game strategy. It's very tactical as opposed to strategic.

Wait, there's a difference between tactical and strategic? Serious question, I've always seen the two used interchangeably.

And having played Hearthstone, I agree that it's definitely a very different way of playing. The card designs would need a complete overhaul. The tactics/strategy may be different but I find it a lot easier to play Hearthstone on autopilot, just picking good trades or even just swinging away wildly to wear down a big threat over time.

Gwaer
04-27-2014, 08:15 PM
A strategy is a larger, over all plan that can comprise several tactics, which are smaller, focused, less impactful plans that are part of the over all plan.

^ copy pasta from some website somewhere.

Malicus
04-27-2014, 08:38 PM
A strategy is a larger, over all plan that can comprise several tactics, which are smaller, focused, less impactful plans that are part of the over all plan.

^ copy pasta from some website somewhere.

My favourite explanation is the Sage of Lake Miral explaining the scale based categorisation of magic to Shiroe in Log Horizon (anime) ep 13 I think :P but maybe that's just because I re-watched it so recently.

ossuary
04-27-2014, 09:21 PM
I hate copy pasta. It's too same-y. I prefer unique pastas.

Rycajo
04-27-2014, 10:26 PM
Cory's most recent blog post (http://coryhudsonjones.tumblr.com/post/83645967847/hex-beta-is-almost-here) actually teased a PvE troop that treats damage as a permanent effect.

card link (https://hextcg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/WEB_Card_2.png)

At some future date, I wouldn't be surprised to see some PvE content with a global rule change to make damage permanent for the dungeon. Or perhaps some keyword like Magic's Wither will be introduced to make things permanent. However, for standard PvP matches, I'm happy to have non-permanent damage be the norm.

RoaRawR
04-28-2014, 12:12 AM
I think it is fine or massive 1-2 cost unit would be very pwoerfull

Turtlewing
04-28-2014, 12:26 AM
I prefer non perminant damage. But regardless of preference it's a bit late to make a change that fundamental (it would require a full rebalance of the game).

And Hex does have a couple of regeneration like mechanics already. There's the skelatin that turns into a pile of bones when it dies (and can be turned back for a cost), and there's "revert" which removes damage (and all other effects). I think we'll see more in future sets.

With regards to tactics vs strategy, they are usually synonymous because they differ primarily in scale and scale is relative. But generally strategy implies an extended conflict composed of several smaller conflicts where the outcomes of the small conflicts are cumulative whereas tactics implies either a single isolated conflict, or several conflicts who's outcomes don't affect each other.

Eierdotter
04-28-2014, 12:49 AM
the damage being permanent is a bigger decision than the resource system.
changing this would require a huge change in the cards and a bigger loss in players.

perfekt for a keyword or dungeon though