PDA

View Full Version : The RNG on this game sux....



IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 08:23 AM
Getting totally fustrated i don't know what to do anymore. I've been playing a deck with only 11 blood cards, the rest are ruby, with 1 treshold max on the blood cards, and 2 treshold on the ruby ones. I have 12 Ruby 10 Blood Shards. I even tried increasing to 24 shards, but i get more flooded than anything else. If i run dual shards, well, they just blatantly suck, as they slow your starting hand, i wonder why they don't make it work as dual lands worked in Magic.

Things that happens to me in most games:

a) I get Shard flooded
b) I get only 1 Shard
c) I get 2-3 Shards of the opposite treshold i need
d) I get 1 of each, but during the next 5 draws not a single damn shard

Im so tired of this... Really, i've played Magic for long time, and sometimes RNG can be like this, but this is happening to me in 80% of my games, and don't tell me 22 shards aren't enough for a Deck where the max cost card is 5 and
i have only one of them, most of them are 1-2 cost and a few couple 3 cost.

I don't think is normal this happens

Saeijou
05-28-2015, 08:24 AM
haven't seen a thread like that in a while... :D

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 08:26 AM
haven't seen a thread like that in a while... :DWell man, if you had my luck, you'd be complaining as well, trust me, this isn't normal. No matter how many shards i add or remove. I even have 3x Crimson Clarity and they just show up when i less need them lol, its like i have bad karma or something xD.

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 08:29 AM
yeah, not much to say here.
This is a very typical post. We can all commiserate with you.
A lot of people with MTG backgrounds make comparisons to MTG, and 9/10 times the player mentions MTG has less variance regarding resources - less times they have been screwed, less times they have been flooded.
While MTG may have a different way to factor in RNG for shuffling, it's still RNG, and this is still simply poor perception.

The shard system was designed to be all about RNG. This leads to frustrating moments. Humans brains are trained to focus on negative experiences more so than positive ones. Apparently it takes 6 positive experiences to replace 1 negative one (old study). That means you need to have 6+ good hands to make you not care about your 1 bad hand.... Sometimes you just aren't that lucky.
Mulligan appropriately, is crucial to your success in HEX.

rjselzler
05-28-2015, 08:38 AM
Mulligan appropriately, is crucial to your success in HEX.

You hit the nail on the head, Nico. This goes double for PvP.

Craig Wescoe, one of my all-time favorite TCG pros, dropped this sage advice years ago in an article that has always stuck with me on how to mulligan: Ask yourself, "If I lose, will it be because I kept this hand?" If your gut instinct is yes, then throw it back, if it is no, then keep it. Of course that only works with the first two mill choices, but it is solid advice nonetheless, especially for people (like me) who tend to want to keep ultra-greedy starting hands.

Scammanator
05-28-2015, 08:44 AM
If you're interested, I might be able to help you convert your two-shard deck to a single-shard deck, that would help you avoid a couple of your concerns. Mono-Ruby Orcs can be pretty good.

But yeah, it sounds like you've hit a string of bad luck. They happen. It's worthwhile to work through them. Keep calm and carry on.

JakeFreedom
05-28-2015, 09:05 AM
Getting totally fustrated i don't know what to do anymore. I've been playing a deck with only 11 blood cards, the rest are ruby, with 1 treshold max on the blood cards, and 2 treshold on the ruby ones. I have 12 Ruby 10 Blood Shards. I even tried increasing to 24 shards, but i get more flooded than anything else. If i run dual shards, well, they just blatantly suck, as they slow your starting hand, i wonder why they don't make it work as dual lands worked in Magic.

Things that happens to me in most games:

a) I get Shard flooded
b) I get only 1 Shard
c) I get 2-3 Shards of the opposite treshold i need
d) I get 1 of each, but during the next 5 draws not a single damn shard

Im so tired of this... Really, i've played Magic for long time, and sometimes RNG can be like this, but this is happening to me in 80% of my games, and don't tell me 22 shards aren't enough for a Deck where the max cost card is 5 and
i have only one of them, most of them are 1-2 cost and a few couple 3 cost.

I don't think is normal this happens



This is a good read, and might change your views on the RNG in the game..
http://hextcg.com/randomization/

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 09:17 AM
If you're interested, I might be able to help you convert your two-shard deck to a single-shard deck, that would help you avoid a couple of your concerns. Mono-Ruby Orcs can be pretty good.

But yeah, it sounds like you've hit a string of bad luck. They happen. It's worthwhile to work through them. Keep calm and carry on. Yes i'd be interested my ingame name is IzHaN. The thing is that i think im missing crucial cards to make it completely red, so i am rellying still on a few blood cards to fill up the deck.


This is a good read, and might change your views on the RNG in the game..
http://hextcg.com/randomization/Thank you, i did read it, very interesting article, yet, i still think either my luck sucks, or the RNG on this game is very bad

Tazelbain
05-28-2015, 09:19 AM
I felt the same way then I started learning some of the math and figured out how costly the decks I was creating. For a while, I used a spreadsheet until my instincts adjusted. And I still go back to it every one in a while a deck is giving me trouble.

Also: CC isn't fixing and you can still have a cost heavy deck with only 1 card cost 5 or greater.

Fiveshards Article on Mulligans (http://fiveshards.com/from-the-deck-mulling-mulligans/)

desk
05-28-2015, 09:23 AM
As everyone has said draws are random so sometimes you will get flooded or starved. However it is important to think of consistency when deck building which can reduce your resource issues. Just from what you said I think your deck could be better optimized.

Running a mono shard deck will make it more consistent to get your thresholds, or running some of the fixing shards will help with with a multi shard deck. I think its good that the fixing shards have draw backs, it should not be a no brainier to build a multi shard deck that works.

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 09:43 AM
I also failed to mention that a 10/12 split is not a good split for consistency in a 2 threshold deck. You should probably either up the resources, add dual shards, or add other fixing like immortal tears. Even with a low curve, its pretty scary to run that with double threshold requirement cards. Not all decks are as consistent as the dwarf robot decks, and they can get away with it due to a large volume of playable artifacts.

Thrawn
05-28-2015, 09:55 AM
The RNG in the game works fine.

Plenty of lands in Magic come into play tapped which slow you down the same way that the current dual shards do.

You just had a string of crappy luck, if the RNG was broken that bad the forums would be nothing but these threads.

Saeijou
05-28-2015, 10:26 AM
The RNG in the game works fine.

Plenty of lands in Magic come into play tapped which slow you down the same way that the current dual shards do.

You just had a string of crappy luck, if the RNG was broken that bad the forums would be nothing but these threads.

well... just 20% of the threads are about that topic :D

Cory_Jones
05-28-2015, 10:34 AM
I am sad this person isn't enjoying the game, BUT...

the forum title with sucks spelled SUX cracked me up :)
well done man!

Zophie
05-28-2015, 10:46 AM
OP: It's likely a combination of back luck and insufficient deck optimization. Tweak your resource ratios and curve as much as you can, and play versus computer in Proving Grounds a bunch to test it as you make changes.


well... just 20% of the threads are about that topic :D

http://i.imgur.com/9EkN95f.jpg

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 11:02 AM
Seriously im sick of this. So i've been doing sooo many arenas today, i've managed to fill up more my deck enough to run a MONO deck. So i went down to 18 shard rubys + 4 inmortal tears. I am still getting 50% of the times.. flooded or only 1 shard... or 2 shards with 3 cost cards only in hand or even the unique 5 cost card i got in my deck. Seriously, this is sick ;(.. I have 11x 1 cost carsd.. wtf are they?

Phenteo
05-28-2015, 11:05 AM
So i've been doing sooo many arenas today, i've managed to fill up more my deck enough to run a MONO deck.

Post your deck list.

Sorry to hear you're not enjoying the game but, like it was mentioned before, your mulligan strategy in the beginning means a lot. Maybe you don't have a proper tempo to your deck? Have you played other Trading Card Games before HEX?

hex_colin
05-28-2015, 11:07 AM
Seriously im sick of this. So i've been doing sooo many arenas today, i've managed to fill up more my deck enough to run a MONO deck. So i went down to 18 shard rubys + 4 inmortal tears. I am still getting 50% of the times.. flooded or only 1 shard... or 2 shards with 3 cost cards only in hand or even the unique 5 cost card i got in my deck. Seriously, this is sick ;(.. I have 11x 1 cost carsd.. wtf are they?

That's way, way too few resources in almost every deck except the low cost dwarf/artifact aggro deck. The fact that you have a at least 1 5 cost card in your deck means you need 22-23 resources, even in a mono-shard deck. Tears don't really count - they're fixing that is completely useless in a mono-shard deck (again, unless you need fuel for Construct Foreman).

Showsni
05-28-2015, 11:45 AM
My aggressive mono Ruby Orc arena deck runs

22 shards
16 1 costs
12 2 costs (4 of which draw extra cards to help draw out of flood/screw)
4 3 costs (which all deck thin)
2 4 costs
4 5 costs (which I don't really aim to hardcast necessarily, as they create a 1 drop in play just from drawing them and can be a finisher with my 3 cost)

and it rarely has resource issues. 22 shards is on the low end, though, as this deck can survive with just one or two shards in play. If I was running cards like Tetalca I'd rather have more shards, as she has to be hardcast or she's just a dead card.

Svenn
05-28-2015, 11:50 AM
That's way, way too few resources in almost every deck except the low cost dwarf/artifact aggro deck. The fact that you have a at least 1 5 cost card in your deck means you need 22-23 resources, even in a mono-shard deck. Tears don't really count - they're fixing that is completely useless in a mono-shard deck (again, unless you need fuel for Construct Foreman).

Definitely way too low on resources. With 18 resources there's a 25% chance your opening hand will have only 1 shard. There's only a 23% chance you'll have 3 shards.

Hex is made for more resources. That's why champ powers are for. Your standard deck should be running 24-26. Low cost (ie decks with few/no cards over 3 cost) can get away with 22ish. 18 is going to cause a ton of problems.

janome
05-28-2015, 01:03 PM
change to mono ruby, up red lands to 24/25. especially for arena. you are not going to die in arena because of lands unless you get super flooded.

Turtlewing
05-28-2015, 01:09 PM
To answer this:


i wonder why they don't make it work as dual lands worked in Magic.


The dual lands in Magic are poorly designed. They're strictly superior to regular lands and therefore top tier constructed decks run the maximum of them. That combined with their rarity inflates the cost of competitive constructed play.

Lands with a drawback (like pain lands) are better balanced overall, and that's closer to the power level of the Hex nonbasic shards.

Additionally Hex's threshold system makes translating a dual land precisely a bit tricky, as neither selecting 1 of 2 thresholds, nor gaining 1 each of 2 thresholds is quite the same as a land that can tap for one mana of two colors.

[edit] I suppsoe the "comes into play tapped" lands are actually the better parallel to the duals shards.

israel.kendall
05-28-2015, 01:14 PM
http://i.imgur.com/QlAUqZj.jpg

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 01:35 PM
It's ultimately a deck building issue. As many others have mentioned.

Aradon
05-28-2015, 01:36 PM
To answer this:



The dual lands in Magic are poorly designed. They're strictly superior to regular lands and therefore top tier constructed decks run the maximum of them. That combined with their rarity inflates the cost of competitive constructed play.

Lands with a drawback (like pain lands) are better balanced overall, and that's closer to the power level of the Hex nonbasic shards.

Additionally Hex's threshold system makes translating a dual land precisely a bit tricky, as neither selecting 1 of 2 thresholds, nor gaining 1 each of 2 thresholds is quite the same as a land that can tap for one mana of two colors.

[edit] I suppsoe the "comes into play tapped" lands are actually the better parallel to the duals shards.

Current duals are pretty close to Bad River & cycle ( http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=382851 )analogously, though even those duals are better than Hex's. The fact that they lock you in to the color they provide is a little tougher, but it's the closest parallel I've seen.

Showsni
05-28-2015, 01:41 PM
The dual lands in Magic are poorly designed. They're strictly superior to regular lands

Well, I wouldn't say strictly better. :) (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=6123)

janome
05-28-2015, 01:55 PM
To answer this:



The dual lands in Magic are poorly designed. They're strictly superior to regular lands and therefore top tier constructed decks run the maximum of them. That combined with their rarity inflates the cost of competitive constructed play.

there are many, many variations of dual lands.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 02:24 PM
More info on my deck, just if someone tells me isn't optimized:

18x Ruby Shard

Troops
--------------------
3x Ridge Raider
4x Savage Raider
4x Arena Brawler
1x Furious Taskmaster
4x Brutal Commander
2x Veteran Gladiator
1x Gem Crazy Berseker
1x Tellalac The Gladiator
1x Goreseeker
--------------

Actions
----------------
4x Burn
2x Boulder Toss
2x Crush
4x Ruby Aura
4x Crimson Clarity
1x Gore Feast of Keg'Tepell
4x Inmortal Tears

IronPheasant
05-28-2015, 02:25 PM
If i run dual shards, well, they just blatantly suck, as they slow your starting hand

Every MTG player knows that even slow dual shards are exponentially better than no dual shards. Your opening hand is 80% of the cards you'll get to play, not being able to play them means you lose. Better to lose a one drop than a game.

Of course if one is playing one drops, they should wait for the fast $$$ dual shards in set 3 or play mono.


The dual lands in Magic are poorly designed. They're strictly superior to regular lands and therefore top tier constructed decks run the maximum of them. That combined with their rarity inflates the cost of competitive constructed play.

Yeah, hex is doing the same thing but took a few sets to get to the chase rares for lands. Hell, the tribal lands are even better than MTG rare dual lands since you can get a third perk if you don't need threshold.

wolzarg
05-28-2015, 02:26 PM
Current duals are pretty close to Bad River & cycle ( http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=382851 )analogously, though even those duals are better than Hex's. The fact that they lock you in to the color they provide is a little tougher, but it's the closest parallel I've seen.
You have to consider how much more lenient the color system is in hex tho.

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 02:26 PM
Your deck is not optimized. drop the immortal tears, and play 4 more ruby shards. In a mono ruby beat down rush deck, you dont want the tears slowing you down.
You might even want a 23rd shard - since your deck has 0 card draw. That is the major difference from running this list without Psychotic Anarchist.

magic_gazz
05-28-2015, 02:27 PM
First glance without even thinking and I would say immortal tears is bad.

Take it out and replace with 4 resources.

Also consider it might not just be screw/flood that is effecting you. If you empty out all your threats and your opponent deals with them it is going to be very hard to win. It could be that you need to change the way you play certain matches.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 02:28 PM
Post your deck list.

Sorry to hear you're not enjoying the game but, like it was mentioned before, your mulligan strategy in the beginning means a lot. Maybe you don't have a proper tempo to your deck? Have you played other Trading Card Games before HEX?
Im veteran from Magic The Gathering. I just posted my list, check it out. I think that with that many resources and low cost cards, it should run smoothly specially adding the fact i added 4 artifacts 1 cost, that helps you empty faster your deck from shards and helps you locate them, so virtually its like having 18/22 resources.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 02:31 PM
But i tried with 22 resource, and i usually end up being flooded, i don't know how you do it guys.

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 02:32 PM
But i tried with 22 resource, and i usually end up being flooded, i don't know how you do it guys.
Perhaps you have very bad luck or unreasonable expectations. Variance is a given. We can't avoid it. Sometimes it will be 100% in our favor, and sometimes it will not.

Your shard curve allows you to keep 1 shard hands, 5 or more shards would be foolish to keep. Even sometimes 4 or more shards.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 02:33 PM
First glance without even thinking and I would say immortal tears is bad.

Take it out and replace with 4 resources.

Also consider it might not just be screw/flood that is effecting you. If you empty out all your threats and your opponent deals with them it is going to be very hard to win. It could be that you need to change the way you play certain matches.Is not about how i play the matches, is about the starting hand. Like i explained on the first post.. If i don't get flooded, i get either resource screwed, or the cards aren't the 1-2 cost cards, but the 3 one's with low resources on my hand etc. Its like 2 out of 10 hands i get something decent, not even near perfection.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 02:34 PM
Perhaps you have very bad luck or unreasonable expectations. Variance is a given. We can't avoid it. Sometimes it will be 100% in our favor, and sometimes it will not.If this keeps going on, i'll post a video showing you my bad luck, to prove what i am saying. The fun thing is that i been running a 3 color before white/red/blue and i barely was getting resource compared to this.. its just hilarous.

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 02:36 PM
If this keeps going on, i'll post a video showing you my bad luck, to prove what i am saying. The fun thing is that i been running a 3 color before white/red/blue and i barely was getting resource compared to this.. its just hilarous.

It may be truly bad luck.... Just chalk it up to that. The argument always will be is your individual bad luck statistically significant for the entire game? The resounding answer will always be no. You really need to play a 1,000+ games to even break the iceberg here of whether or not something is truly broken, and unfortunately in a game like Hex, your bad RNG may result in 10 other players experiencing good RNG. There is no rhyme or reason to it, just statistics.

Anyways, someone linked a good article early on this thread that explains the RNG in Hex.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 02:38 PM
So i am just testing as we speak. First hand: 5 Red shards, 1 Burn, 1 Boulder Toss... I mulligan... I get 2x Burn 2x Arena Brawler 1x Savage Rider 1x Red Shard.... -.- I mulligan again ... 4x Red Shard 1x Ridge Raider.... (fustrating)

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 02:38 PM
So i am just testing as we speak. First hand: 5 Red shards, 1 Burn, 1 Boulder Toss... I mulligan... I get 2x Burn 2x Arena Brawler 1x Savage Rider 1x Red Shard.... -.- I mulligan again ... 4x Red Shard 1x Ridge Raider.... (fustrating)

You should have kept your first mulligan hand.

AdamAoE2
05-28-2015, 02:46 PM
You should have kept your first mulligan hand.

I agree. If you're running a mono-ruby aggro deck, I consider both of those hands keepable. Especially if you're using the conflagration gloves equipment for Burn. Heck, I'd argue the 2nd hand was better then the first one.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 02:47 PM
You should have kept your first mulligan hand.
No, because i was testing this, as i said, and if i kept it, i would have been left 6 rounds without getting any resource xD.. its just so infuriating.. i swear, it might be just bad luck, but cmon... ima end up playing just 1 cost cards at this rate lol

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 02:48 PM
I agree. If you're running a mono-ruby aggro deck, I consider both of those hands keepable. Especially if you're using the conflagration gloves equipment for Burn. Heck, I'd argue the 2nd hand was better then the first one.

Yes, and just for clarifying - the first mulligan = the second hand.

No, because i was testing this, as i said, and if i kept it, i would have been left 6 rounds without getting any resource xD.. its just so infuriating.. i swear, it might be just bad luck, but cmon... ima end up playing just 1 cost cards at this rate lol
you don't know what you don't know. Sometimes the gamble works, and sometimes it doesn't, but with 3 playable cards, and 2 playable with 1 shard draw, you were sitting pretty.

IronPheasant
05-28-2015, 02:48 PM
Why, there's your problem right there.

If you're playing tons of one drops, you should be able to function on 2 shards and max out at 3, making an opening hand with one perfectly fine. If you want an opening hand that simultaneously wants one shard and three shards to be in it at the same time, you have a curve working against itself.

Your curve basically starts at 3 mana in this deck. Swap out the Savage Raiders for taskmasters or something better; you need around 12 to 16 minimum playable one drops if you want to go aggro. Play midrange with 24 shards until your collection can support that.

Showsni
05-28-2015, 02:56 PM
So i am just testing as we speak. First hand: 5 Red shards, 1 Burn, 1 Boulder Toss... I mulligan... I get 2x Burn 2x Arena Brawler 1x Savage Rider 1x Red Shard.... -.- I mulligan again ... 4x Red Shard 1x Ridge Raider.... (fustrating)

That second hand seems like a perfectly fine one to keep. You can play four of the cards in it, and only need one more shard to play the other two as well. Your opening hand doesn't need to have enough shards in it to play your entire hand. Trust your deck; chances are, you'll draw into that second Ruby shard within a few turns.

Some cards in your deck are less than optimal. Boulder Toss is good, but it's a dead card without a troop on the table, making it essentially a blank card in that first hand you drew. Maybe replace with something like Crackling Bolt that can always be played. Crimson Clarity is pure card disadvantage for slight tempo gain; it might not be worth running all four. If you can get them, the fourth Ridge Raider and 4 Fierce Warlords should be very useful. I'd also want to run more Crushing Blows, to combo with the Brutal Commanders, especially if you can manage to pick up a Xocoy or 4. If I was to adjust your deck, bearing budget constraints in mind and sticking to uncommons and commons, I might try running something like:

Champ: Giles

22 x Ruby Shard

Troops (25)
--------------------
4 x Ridge Raider
4 x Savage Raider
4 x Fierce Warlord
4 x Furious Taskmaster
4 x Brutal Commander
4 x Veteran Gladiator
1 x Gem Crazed Berserker

--------------

Actions (13)
----------------
4 x Burn
4 x Crushing Blow
4 x Crackling Bolt
1 x Gore Feast of Keg'Tepetl

Equips to try and get would be those for Burn, Crushing Blow, Ridge Raider and/or Brutal Commander (and Xocoy if you can get him!).

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:00 PM
Ok, heres a few more tests: I listen to your advice guys. I get 2x Ridge Raiders 1xShard 2x Boulder Toss 2x Burn .. I am like.. ok that should cover me a few turns right? After sitting with 1 shard on turn 8, i got destroyed by the computer.

Next game: First hand i get 1x Crimson Clarity 4x Ruby Shard 1x Gem Crazed Orc 1x Boulder Toss... ok this time i am like.. sure.. maybe since i grab 4 shards i might get troops now.. but... nvm... i kept getting shards until the 8th shard... result: i got destroyed....

No matter how hard i try... i am either fucked up or i don't know whats going on... I been playing the game for 2 weeks now... i believe.. and this is the first time ever i complain about RNG... like i said.. i was running a Ruby/Diamond/Sapphire with 12x Dual Shard and 2x Shards of Fate.. and it was working wonderful... Is just not my style of deck.. its a lot slower.. and i want this fuking mono ruby to work >.<

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:04 PM
That second hand seems like a perfectly fine one to keep. You can play four of the cards in it, and only need one more shard to play the other two as well. Your opening hand doesn't need to have enough shards in it to play your entire hand. Trust your deck; chances are, you'll draw into that second Ruby shard within a few turns.

Some cards in your deck are less than optimal. Boulder Toss is good, but it's a dead card without a troop on the table, making it essentially a blank card in that first hand you drew. Maybe replace with something like Crackling Bolt that can always be played. Crimson Clarity is pure card disadvantage for slight tempo gain; it might not be worth running all four. If you can get them, the fourth Ridge Raider and 4 Fierce Warlords should be very useful. I'd also want to run more Crushing Blows, to combo with the Brutal Commanders, especially if you can manage to pick up a Xocoy or 4. If I was to adjust your deck, bearing budget constraints in mind and sticking to uncommons and commons, I might try running something like:

Champ: Giles

22 x Ruby Shard

Troops (25)
--------------------
4 x Ridge Raider
4 x Savage Raider
4 x Fierce Warlord
4 x Furious Taskmaster
4 x Brutal Commander
4 x Veteran Gladiator
1 x Gem Crazed Berserker

--------------

Actions (13)
----------------
4 x Burn
4 x Crushing Blow
4 x Crackling Bolt
1 x Gore Feast of Keg'Tepetl

Equips to try and get would be those for Burn, Crushing Blow, Ridge Raider and/or Brutal Commander (and Xocoy if you can get him!).That's somehow the deck im trying to aim for. Im running the equipment for the Brutal Commander (Gloves + Trinket), Ridge Raiders (Helm),

magic_gazz
05-28-2015, 03:09 PM
Is not about how i play the matches, is about the starting hand. Like i explained on the first post.. If i don't get flooded, i get either resource screwed, or the cards aren't the 1-2 cost cards, but the 3 one's with low resources on my hand etc. Its like 2 out of 10 hands i get something decent, not even near perfection.

Sorry but I struggle to believe this.

I have probably played thousands of games and been a mtg player for over 12 years, the variance here is no worse than any other game.

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 03:09 PM
Ok, heres a few more tests: I listen to your advice guys. I get 2x Ridge Raiders 1xShard 2x Boulder Toss 2x Burn .. I am like.. ok that should cover me a few turns right? After sitting with 1 shard on turn 8, i got destroyed by the computer.

Next game: First hand i get 1x Crimson Clarity 4x Ruby Shard 1x Gem Crazed Orc 1x Boulder Toss... ok this time i am like.. sure.. maybe since i grab 4 shards i might get troops now.. but... nvm... i kept getting shards until the 8th shard... result: i got destroyed....

No matter how hard i try... i am either unicornpooped up or i don't know whats going on... I been playing the game for 2 weeks now... i believe.. and this is the first time ever i complain about RNG... like i said.. i was running a Ruby/Diamond/Sapphire with 12x Dual Shard and 2x Shards of Fate.. and it was working wonderful... Is just not my style of deck.. its a lot slower.. and i want this fuking mono ruby to work >.<
I don't know what to tell you buddy. Just don't give up. It's not the game that is screwing you, it is really your mentality towards statistically improbable situations.

This is why I run 4x Ridge Raider with the Infiltrators Hood. I've had games where I did get stuck on 1 shard, and I still won. However, I've also played games where I've drawn 9 resources, and still won. Your deck list has issues. I understand it's budget, but you are 100% focused on early game steam. Your late game steam is not strong enough. You have 0 card draw, and initially your resource base was flawed. If you want some inspiration to build off, just look again at my ruby orcs deck on the strategy forum, and make note of why that list works.... There are several interactions and synergies that get combo wins, but there is also an early game, mid-game, and late game strategy.

Hex is not a game where you should expect yourself to win everytime. RNG is part of the game, and partially what makes it enjoyable to many.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:12 PM
Next game: I mulligan x3 times.. 0 shards in all 3 hands :D

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:14 PM
Sorry but I struggle to believe this.

I have probably played thousands of games and been a mtg player for over 12 years, the variance here is no worse than any other game.Well man, im posting my hands as i am playing games, look at them, im not lying, the variance here is terrible compared to MTG... you can't deny that.

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 03:14 PM
Next game: I mulligan x3 times.. 0 shards in all 3 hands :D
are you still running 18 shards?

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:15 PM
I don't know what to tell you buddy. Just don't give up. It's not the game that is screwing you, it is really your mentality towards statistically improbable situations.

This is why I run 4x Ridge Raider with the Infiltrators Hood. I've had games where I did get stuck on 1 shard, and I still won. However, I've also played games where I've drawn 9 resources, and still won. Your deck list has issues. I understand it's budget, but you are 100% focused on early game steam. Your late game steam is not strong enough. You have 0 card draw, and initially your resource base was flawed. If you want some inspiration to build off, just look again at my ruby orcs deck on the strategy forum, and make note of why that list works.... There are several interactions and synergies that get combo wins, but there is also an early game, mid-game, and late game strategy.

Hex is not a game where you should expect yourself to win everytime. RNG is part of the game, and partially what makes it enjoyable to many.I mean, i know late game power i lack of it, but cmon, i got a lot of early game power, and thats all i need usually vs computer in turn 3-4 computer usually is dead when i get a decent hand, but its like this game is cursing me or something since i switched to the mono deck :(

Svenn
05-28-2015, 03:15 PM
Next game: I mulligan x3 times.. 0 shards in all 3 hands :D

Bump up to 22 shards. Let us know the results.

And it's possible you've just got bad luck. Set 2 release weekend I played 18 drafts. 14 of those I got resource screwed and went out the first round. It happens. I bounced back. It sucked, but that's just how RNG works... sometimes you hit really bad runs.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:15 PM
are you still running 18 shards?

No, thats the worst part, i did listen to you guys, and took off the 4x Inmortal Tears and got 22 ruby shards xD

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 03:17 PM
No, thats the worst part, i did listen to you guys, and took off the 4x Inmortal Tears and got 22 ruby shards xDmake sure the change saved... Again very random that you would not draw a single shard after 3 mulligans.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:17 PM
Bump up to 22 shards. Let us know the results.

And it's possible you've just got bad luck. Set 2 release weekend I played 18 drafts. 14 of those I got resource screwed and went out the first round. It happens. I bounced back. It sucked, but that's just how RNG works... sometimes you hit really bad runs.Look, i love this game, and i'd like more than anyone here, that this game went well, and it had a future, and a playerbase, and to play over and over, because it reminds me of my old magic days, but cmon, i never had this stupid variance or bad RNG in magic ever. Im not trying to compare the games, ok? Im giving my feedback, or my perception of things. Its not possible that i am running constantly into flood or shard screw hands on a MONO Ruby Deck (now with 22 shards as most people adviced) where most of my cards are 1-2 cost.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:19 PM
make sure the change saved... Again very random that you would not draw a single shard after 3 mulligans.Yes nico i checked, its saved, i don't know guys, i don't wanna look like a fool here, or someone crying over the system, i swear i would never do something like that, but i can't believe this is just bad LUCK, when its happening to me all day since i switched to this deck. Sure deck is not perfect, but how is possible im having more issues on a MONO deck than a tricolor deck? That doesnt makes sense.

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 03:23 PM
Yes nico i checked, its saved, i don't know guys, i don't wanna look like a fool here, or someone crying over the system, i swear i would never do something like that, but i can't believe this is just bad LUCK, when its happening to me all day since i switched to this deck. Sure deck is not perfect, but how is possible im having more issues on a MONO deck than a tricolor deck? That doesnt makes sense.
Um, if you are superstitious at all, maybe delete the deck, close the game completely. Re-open the game, run a repair install.

Rebuild the deck, add all the shards last. Save the deck and start playing it. See if you have better luck. I usually add my shards to my decks last. I know it doesn't make a difference, but its just superstition. Maybe having a weird OCD superstition will help you with the RNG gods.

Phenteo
05-28-2015, 03:26 PM
Looking through your game history, it seems pretty normal. There are some tough Champions in the arena that your deck may not be suited to beat, but you've had several really good runs in the arena for being a relatively new player to the game.

It may just be more of a perception issue at this point. I can commiserate on getting shard screwed/flooded. But that is the RNG of it. I've worked on several MMOs where the really good wins don't stand out as much as the really bad failures.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:26 PM
Im over... Next game.. I mulligan x2 (because first hand and the next 2 mulligans again 0 shards) then i get 2 shards, 2 brutal commander and... im on turn 6 still waiting for that shard /cry

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:29 PM
Just in case people doesn't believe it... Here's my luck... pfft

http://i.imgur.com/i4pfksb.jpg?1

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 03:38 PM
Looking through your game history, it seems pretty normal. There are some tough Champions in the arena that your deck may not be suited to beat, but you've had several really good runs in the arena for being a relatively new player to the game.

It may just be more of a perception issue at this point. I can commiserate on getting shard screwed/flooded. But that is the RNG of it. I've worked on several MMOs where the really good wins don't stand out as much as the really bad failures.Excuse my ignorance. How can i check my game history? I didn't know i could check it out. About the Champions in the arena, i've beaten 'em all including Xarlox with this deck, yet i have to find Urunaz, found him once when my deck was so basic.

nicosharp
05-28-2015, 03:40 PM
Excuse my ignorance. How can i check my game history? I didn't know i could check it out. About the Champions in the arena, i've beaten 'em all including Xarlox with this deck, yet i have to find Urunaz, found him once when my deck was so basic.
You can't. He can.
Beating an encounter is easy. Doing it consistently is hard.

RamzaBehoulve
05-28-2015, 03:46 PM
You can't. He can.
Beating an encounter is easy. Doing it consistently is hard.

And by that he meant Phenteo is a HexEnt employee.

Hopefully, that history tool is going to find its way to us as well one day. Would really help a lot keeping track of successes/failures with particular decks.

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 04:00 PM
You can't. He can.
Beating an encounter is easy. Doing it consistently is hard.
Just found mr. Xarlox again, he beat me just by lucky 2x terratantula leaving me defendless when he had 3hp left and i had 10hp left. Then the next game.. i managed to kill him in 3rd turn... This deck isn't perfect but has been doing well vs Xarlox compared to the tricolor.

Zophie
05-28-2015, 04:04 PM
Just found mr. Xarlox again, he beat me just by lucky 2x terratantula leaving me defendless when he had 3hp left and i had 10hp left. Then the next game.. i managed to kill him in 3rd turn... This deck isn't perfect but has been doing well vs Xarlox compared to the tricolor.

Success! I knew you could do it!

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 04:10 PM
Success! I knew you could do it!

Thank you but really i'd say 1 out of 50 this will happen :(. I expected to run more into this Crimsom Clarity + Brutal Commander combo since i have 4 of each... and i rarely see both in my starting hand.

RCDv57
05-28-2015, 04:34 PM
This is somewhat off topic but, all of these Procced off of one charge gain.
http://i.imgur.com/wR39uuf.jpg

I really wish that my luck went into more useful things like Primals, and finding Uruunaz

IzHaN80
05-28-2015, 04:47 PM
This is somewhat off topic but, all of these Procced off of one charge gain.
http://i.imgur.com/wR39uuf.jpg

I really wish that my luck went into more useful things like Primals, and finding UruunazFun picture :P

About Uruunaz, i been playing for 2 weeks this game, and i found him once, yet, i was playing on a very basic deck, like.. really i had no chances to do something on that encounter, it pissed me off so much. He could have waited i was ready for him xD

israel.kendall
05-28-2015, 04:50 PM
Fun picture :P

About Uruunaz, i been playing for 2 weeks this game, and i found him once, yet, i was playing on a very basic deck, like.. really i had no chances to do something on that encounter, it pissed me off so much. He could have waited i was ready for him xD

http://i.imgur.com/6wcCYmh.jpg

RCDv57
05-28-2015, 05:45 PM
Fun picture :P

About Uruunaz, i been playing for 2 weeks this game, and i found him once, yet, i was playing on a very basic deck, like.. really i had no chances to do something on that encounter, it pissed me off so much. He could have waited i was ready for him xD

I've been playing longer than you and I haven't seen him.

N3rd4Christ
05-28-2015, 06:02 PM
It's all the Baby Yeti's fault. He is the true danger in this game!!!

Diesbudt
05-28-2015, 07:34 PM
To stick to my goal, I must post in all these threads.

The Rng is not the main issue, learning how to reduce it as much as possible is a skill in a tcg like this.

Alright goal complete. Off to the next battle.

Diesbudt
05-28-2015, 07:37 PM
Looking through your game history, it seems pretty normal. There are some tough Champions in the arena that your deck may not be suited to beat, but you've had several really good runs in the arena for being a relatively new player to the game.

It may just be more of a perception issue at this point. I can commiserate on getting shard screwed/flooded. But that is the RNG of it. I've worked on several MMOs where the really good wins don't stand out as much as the really bad failures.

Wait. You can see our play history? DONT LOOK AT MY FAILED HEX COMET DECK. Don't you dare!

Azzer
05-29-2015, 01:26 AM
Well man, im posting my hands as i am playing games, look at them, im not lying, the variance here is terrible compared to MTG... you can't deny that.


The variance for me in hex far surpasses that of MTG when i played it, RNG is just that though, Random.

Lefto
05-29-2015, 01:35 AM
Minimize RNG = Play mono-shard deck (with extra card drawing if possible). You sacrifice some potential strength but your deck becomes that much more reliable. And yes, you might lose when your opponents who play multi-shard get god-hands, but other than that you would be in better shape than them most of the time. At least until set 3 comes and we get our hands on them new dual-shards!

NoahBuddy
05-29-2015, 06:06 AM
hey guys. i have been away from the game for awhile ( don't act like you noticed/cared. it's ok). just wanted to say coming back to a screw/flood thread that didn't turn into a flame-o-thon and get locked has surprised me. i see actual helpful advice in here. way to go community!

Gwaer
05-29-2015, 07:10 AM
This is definitely not the first thread that started like this. Helpfully trying to resolve deck building mistakes is the first step of quite a lot of these threads. Though I do have to give it to IzHan80 for actually making deck changes and taking these things constructively. Well done man.

Koz
05-29-2015, 07:11 AM
Please stop posting this as a "This says Randomization in the game is good" link. It's not. It's a "Randomization in the game is truly random for all intents and purposes" link. It says nothing about the design intent and everything about the technical implementation.

I'm hopeful at some point in his Game Design series Ben Stoll will discuss this (and, dare to dream, supporting evidence behind the idea that 15% or games being decided by a completely random shuffler is actually a good thing from a design perspective while simultaneously reducing randomness in match outcomes by making matches best 2 of 3). I've also been hopeful some streamer would take the opportunity to discuss this with Hex folks when they had them on their stream, but none has taken that opportunity so far.

And now, I'll put this thread on ignore because if I say any more, I'll be accused again by Gwaer of trying to ruin his game and/or accused by Ossuary of being intentionally obstinate/obtuse.

So much this.

While the game is fun, I find it ridiculous that it can be so swingy and utterly random. While you can minimize the randomness to a degree in a card game, the way the resource system works in Hex makes for an inordinate amount of high variance during games. For instance, I have my pet arena deck (Bertram Bot Spam) that runs 22 shards and 1 Immortal Tears. I did a run through the arena last night and came off with only a single loss (due to getting shard flooded in a game I could have easily won). I ran the exact same deck again without any changes and had two quick loses due to being shard/screwed flooded. In the first game I drew 12 shards out of 16 cards and got crushed because I couldn't actually get anything in play to do anything. The next game was the complete opposite, and the AI had Cerebral Fulmination in play and I was able to last until I had drawn 22 cards...with only 2 shards among them. Totally rage quit after that.

And yes, I'm totally aware of how and when to mulligan. Sometimes that doesn't help, and this game needs some sort of "1 free mulligan" rule to help mitigate the RNG (like FFG's card games have). Even if it was just "if you have <3 shards or >5 shards, your first mulligan is free". Something!

People can say "it's just RNG bro" all they want, and I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that the RNG is SO random that it's bad for the game. As much fun as the game is overall, I'm not sure how long I can stick with a game that is this swingy. In other card games I play I can build my deck where even if I get a bad hand, I can do something and try and hold out until I can possibly try and turn it around. In this game, there is nothing I can do if I have 7 or 8 shards topdecked or if there are only 1 or 2 in my first 10-12 cards. The frustration level is very high in those instances and it makes me question whether I should just play something else with less RNG and less rage inducing situations.

Gwaer
05-29-2015, 07:25 AM
Everyone's idea of the right amount of variance is going to be different. Some people really like where hex is at. Including myself, and the designers. It's very likely that as time goes on we get very efficient fixers that make decks much less swingy for a block/eternal formats/pve. In the digital space there is a lot of room to reduce variance as time goes on. But right now I very much like where the variance level is. And I will look forward to blocks with minimal fixing in the future as well. There are a lot of knobs to turn here, and a lot of people that are satisfied with where they currently are. That doesn't mean that a block won't come around that will satisfy you as well. But it does mean that the core fundamental resource system isn't changing. Just different methods and strengths of mitigation will be coming along to tinker with.

To put it a different way, another system could never have this high of a variance which I would never be served as someone who likes to play to their outs and overcome a bad streak. I've won tournament after mulling to 4. I love that. So a different system could never serve me. But this system with the proper tools could be tweaked to have no variance whatsoever simply by attaching a keyword to cards that effectively make it so it'll draw and play a resource out of your deck if you're behind your ideal curve for the turn you're on, from hand without being played. I think a format like that would be boring, and basically terrible. But this system is inherently more flexible than any other.

Svenn
05-29-2015, 07:51 AM
Look, i love this game, and i'd like more than anyone here, that this game went well, and it had a future, and a playerbase, and to play over and over, because it reminds me of my old magic days, but cmon, i never had this stupid variance or bad RNG in magic ever. Im not trying to compare the games, ok? Im giving my feedback, or my perception of things. Its not possible that i am running constantly into flood or shard screw hands on a MONO Ruby Deck (now with 22 shards as most people adviced) where most of my cards are 1-2 cost.
Since it hasn't been said yet... most people playing magic didn't shuffle properly. There appears to be less variance because your deck shuffling is not truly random. So, you were most likely cheating (unintentionally, of course). Hex has a truly random (well, as random as a computer can do) shuffler.

Xenavire
05-29-2015, 08:03 AM
Svenn is correct, human shuffling is rarely truly random. This skews the results and perceptions of the player.

Sparrow
05-29-2015, 08:09 AM
Personally, having come from the MTGO environment, the resource system in Hex is much more flexible. The big improvement is the threshold system -- you don't need two sapph shards to cast two, one threshold sapph spells. The other factor is charge powers being an outlet for drawing excess shards.

So, I guess it's a matter of what you're used to and have experienced. I have no complaints about how this game addresses resources.

DoctorJoe
05-29-2015, 08:28 AM
Pretty much exactly what Sparrow said.

Steelio
05-29-2015, 09:29 AM
Hmm. The kind of degree of 'randomness' you are suggesting people should shuffle their decks according to seems unhuman. I myself would say that such a degree is in most circumstances unattainable, and that any digital TCG which seeks to mirror or emulate a physical TCG should account for that, shuffler included. This is my opinion, and one which I consider quite valid.

Also I would like to add that many people implicitly assume that more randomness is better where card shuffling is concerned. But this is by no means axiomatic. And if a completely random shuffler is negatively impinging upon certain aspects of the game, then it's probably quite valid to ask whether the shuffler could be improved.

Also, to accuse people of 'unintentionally cheating' because they cannot shuffle their deck to a basically impossible standard is also [realistically speaking] absurd.

I'm not trying to come across as caustic here, but am merely being analytical.

Personally, I'd like to see a system in place which works with the current resource system to help alleviate screw/flood. I've proposed before [not here admittedly] that champions get sockets for gems with effects pertaining to the mulligan stage of the game. Each colour has a couple of gems, and the thresholds for these gems [major/minor] relate to the the number of cards in your deck of said colour. One gem might allow you to swap a resource for a non-resource and vice versa, another might give you a free mulligan, another might allow you to pay life to turn a card into a resource, etc. I think it'd be nice, and would certainly take the edge off shard screw/flood which can be - it must be said - absolutely brutal at times. The resource system is good, I think it's awesome. It allows for rainbow decks, which is to my mind great. But shard screw and flood are still kinda punishing, and situations do occur where you draw like 10 shards in a row. Such gem sockets certainly wouldn't solve flood, but they would in some ways mitigate screw.

My 0.02.


Since it hasn't been said yet... most people playing magic didn't shuffle properly. There appears to be less variance because your deck shuffling is not truly random. So, you were most likely cheating (unintentionally, of course). Hex has a truly random (well, as random as a computer can do) shuffler.

Aradon
05-29-2015, 09:36 AM
The more you work to mitigate mana screw, the more people are going to trim down their decks to take advantage of their tools. If you give people opportunities to turn cards into shards, they're just going to run fewer lands and return the variance back up to where it's at now, and then if you don't do the same, you're not going to be competing with them on the same level.

Competitive forces have dictated the current system as optimal, and fighting against it's not going to work very well. The best you can do is attempt to mitigate the power differences when shard screwed, which is the opposite of what happens when you increase deck power level by systems like a free mulligan. When you give players a free mulligan, they'll run fewer shards and have stronger decks, but the shard screw rate will remain roughly where it is, and when you're only slightly screwed, you'll be beaten down all that much harder because we've enabled stronger decks overall.

If you want to end mana screw, you need a very long game where it isn't as damaging a factor. Most players don't find those games super exciting, though, so it's not a great option either, and tends to favor control decks anyways.

Steelio
05-29-2015, 09:37 AM
Thomas Nagel wrote a book called 'The View From Nowhere'. Basically talking about how the physical sciences attempt to construct a view of the world which is 'objective', but how this 'objectivity' still stems from perceptions as humans. Which can be summarised as the notion that human perception is one of the things a person can never escape truly from. Which is probably quite relevant here :P


Svenn is correct, human shuffling is rarely truly random. This skews the results and perceptions of the player.

nicosharp
05-29-2015, 09:43 AM
Thomas Nagel wrote a book called 'The View From Nowhere'. Basically talking about how the physical sciences attempt to construct a view of the world which is 'objective', but how this 'objectivity' still stems from perceptions as humans. Which can be summarised as the notion that human perception is one of the things a person can never escape truly from. Which is probably quite relevant here :P
So you basically are saying objectivity is subjectivity. Flip a coin really, it doesn't matter what side you pick. Someone will think heads, and someone will think tails. It doesn't make either person right, but 1 side has to be picked, coins rarely land on their edge.

Azzer
05-29-2015, 09:44 AM
So much this.

While the game is fun, I find it ridiculous that it can be so swingy and utterly random. While you can minimize the randomness to a degree in a card game, the way the resource system works in Hex makes for an inordinate amount of high variance during games. For instance, I have my pet arena deck (Bertram Bot Spam) that runs 22 shards and 1 Immortal Tears. I did a run through the arena last night and came off with only a single loss (due to getting shard flooded in a game I could have easily won). I ran the exact same deck again without any changes and had two quick loses due to being shard/screwed flooded. In the first game I drew 12 shards out of 16 cards and got crushed because I couldn't actually get anything in play to do anything. The next game was the complete opposite, and the AI had Cerebral Fulmination in play and I was able to last until I had drawn 22 cards...with only 2 shards among them. Totally rage quit after that.

And yes, I'm totally aware of how and when to mulligan. Sometimes that doesn't help, and this game needs some sort of "1 free mulligan" rule to help mitigate the RNG (like FFG's card games have). Even if it was just "if you have <3 shards or >5 shards, your first mulligan is free". Something!

People can say "it's just RNG bro" all they want, and I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that the RNG is SO random that it's bad for the game. As much fun as the game is overall, I'm not sure how long I can stick with a game that is this swingy. In other card games I play I can build my deck where even if I get a bad hand, I can do something and try and hold out until I can possibly try and turn it around. In this game, there is nothing I can do if I have 7 or 8 shards topdecked or if there are only 1 or 2 in my first 10-12 cards. The frustration level is very high in those instances and it makes me question whether I should just play something else with less RNG and less rage inducing situations.


I can perfect the arena 9 of 10 times with my deck and the time i lose is mostly because of Xarlox being lucky... RNG is just being true RNG in this game rather than artificial RNG in most other card games.

The problem is the human brain can't handle randomness properly as it always searches for a pattern to something.

I don't really see the problem when you can counter the RNG by proper deckbuilding 99% of the time.

Steelio
05-29-2015, 09:54 AM
Not quite, more so that notions of objectivity are always tainted by subjectivity, and that true objectivity can never be attained on account of which. If I remember correctly he also makes the point that if anything were to be truly 'objective' in that sense then it would cease to be relevant in any personal way, purely because it would have been deprived of any and all elements of subjectivity. I don't want to turn this into a philosophical debate, but the point can be made that the game is made for humans and not for robots :p So I guess I kind of sympathise with the OP, because the RNG in this game can be brutal. I would like to see something done about drawing 7+ shards in a row, but I'm quite happy to play it nonetheless. Shard flood/screw are for me the only downsides to the game. Still a big fan of it though.


So you basically are saying objectivity is subjectivity. Flip a coin really, it doesn't matter what side you pick. Someone will think heads, and someone will think tails. It doesn't make either person right, but 1 side has to be picked, coins rarely land on their edge.

nicetodd
05-29-2015, 09:56 AM
You cannot win by skill alone 100% of the time. Luck plays its part. Seems to mimic real life which is maybe why some don't like it.

On the flip side, I could really use a Gorefeast button at work today.

nicetodd
05-29-2015, 10:31 AM
Take chips off shoulder. This thread will be closed for my nently... In 3,2,1

nicosharp
05-29-2015, 10:40 AM
Posts are like a box of chocolates, you neva know what you gonna get.
http://pageofvomit.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/forrest-gump-original.jpeg
Card draw is like a box of chocolates also.

nicosharp
05-29-2015, 10:52 AM
It's like rain on your wedding day
It's a free ride when you've already paid
It's the good advice that you just didn't take
Who would've thought, it figures

loopholist3
05-29-2015, 11:01 AM
a) I get Shard flooded
b) I get only 1 Shard
c) I get 2-3 Shards of the opposite treshold i need
d) I get 1 of each, but during the next 5 draws not a single damn shard


Deep enough in the thread that I don't expect this to be read, but here is stats anyways.

a) I'll define this as 6 shards or more by turn 5, playing first (kind of a light definition of flood, but you only have 22 shards, so ...): 15.5%
b) 1 Shard opening hand: 15.7%
c) Chance for 2-3 shards of the same color in your opening hand (I don't know how to define 'color you need'): 20.9%
d) 1 of each, no shards for 5 draws: 1.2%

Chance at least 1 of these events occur: 52.2% (and yes, that includes the fact that both a and c can happen to you)

Koz
05-29-2015, 11:05 AM
The more you work to mitigate mana screw, the more people are going to trim down their decks to take advantage of their tools. If you give people opportunities to turn cards into shards, they're just going to run fewer lands and return the variance back up to where it's at now, and then if you don't do the same, you're not going to be competing with them on the same level.

Competitive forces have dictated the current system as optimal, and fighting against it's not going to work very well. The best you can do is attempt to mitigate the power differences when shard screwed, which is the opposite of what happens when you increase deck power level by systems like a free mulligan. When you give players a free mulligan, they'll run fewer shards and have stronger decks, but the shard screw rate will remain roughly where it is, and when you're only slightly screwed, you'll be beaten down all that much harder because we've enabled stronger decks overall.

If you want to end mana screw, you need a very long game where it isn't as damaging a factor. Most players don't find those games super exciting, though, so it's not a great option either, and tends to favor control decks anyways.

All FFG card games have a free mulligan and the games play just fine and are in fact extremely popular, especially Netrunner and Game of Thrones. So I find your claim a bit off considering there is ample evidence that one free mulligan doesn't ruin game balance.

And I'm not sure that people would run less shards with one free mulligan, people don't run less resource generators in FFG's games than they would in any other game, so I'm not sure why people would here. Some might and try and be risky about it, but so what? I would like to run fewer shards to be honest. Shards are necessary, but they are boring. If I had more deck space for troops & spells, I'd be happy to have it.

And lastly, I find your claims that the system is "optimal" to be a bit of a stretch considering there are many, many cards games that have come out since Magic that have alternate resource systems that reduce the variability of the swingy draw. Netrunner was created by Richard Garfield just like Magic was and he created an alternate resource system for that game. Apparently he learned from Magic's shortcomings...too bad Hex didn't.

Sparrow
05-29-2015, 11:16 AM
Deep enough in the thread that I don't expect this to be read, but here is stats anyways.

a) I'll define this as 6 shards or more by turn 5, playing first (kind of a light definition of flood, but you only have 22 shards, so ...): 15.5%
b) 1 Shard opening hand: 15.7%
c) Chance for 2-3 shards of the same color in your opening hand (I don't know how to define 'color you need'): 20.9%
d) 1 of each, no shards for 5 draws: .92%

Chance at least 1 of these events occur: 51.9% (and yes, that includes the fact that both a and c can happen to you)
Nice. I had thought to myself after reading the OP that the percentage of at least one of those events occurring was high, but I was too lazy to figure it out.

nicosharp
05-29-2015, 11:18 AM
I'm personally not opposed to new mulligan systems for HEX.
Of course, any change made that does not require sacrifice, reduces the variance of being at a disadvantage.

Is that a bad thing?

I guess it really depends on how much you want RNG to be a factor.

Do you want the player that simply picked better cards, or early game bombs to win an even higher percentage of times, vs. a player that picked more late game cards, but may not have more early game threats and may not have gotten lucky with removal?

Should players not have to sacrifice advantage for a chance at their best possible starting hand?

What if all 7 cards were selectable, and you could send as many as you want back into the deck once, to draw that many cards off the top? (Like Hearthstone). How powerful would that be in limited with 40 card decks? Do both players equally benefit from this?

If you "fix" the consistency by reducing the variance, and not requiring sacrifice, are you cheapening the experience for some players?

My answer to the above is yes. There are many many games where a player is already at a disadvantage. Their deck is simply not as good against their opponents. It might be a rush deck vs. a control deck with a bad win-rate %, it might be a limited deck where they just were not able to grab cards that were as good or synergistic. The RNG in this game is what allows them to have a chance. If you reduce the RNG by allowing early game adjustments with zero sacrifice, you give 1 player an advantage, every time.

Gwaer
05-29-2015, 11:27 AM
Indeed. I don't play either net runner or game of thrones regularly. Sure they're fun one off games but I wouldn't play game after game of them. They aren't my bag, hex is. And as a competitive player if they added a free mulligan I'd definitely run less resources in my decks, because the chance for me to see the resources I need has increased, and I'd have more gas in the deck to deal with people that haven't made that change. Frankly the current values of resource flood and screw are acceptable to me.

Koz
05-29-2015, 11:30 AM
I'm personally not opposed to new mulligan systems for HEX.
Of course, any change made that does not require sacrifice, reduces the variance of being at a disadvantage.

Is that a bad thing?

I guess it really depends on how much you want RNG to be a factor.

Do you want the player that simply picked better cards, or early game bombs to win an even higher percentage of times, vs. a player that picked more late game cards, but may not have more early game threats and may not have gotten lucky with removal?

Should players not have to sacrifice advantage for a chance at their best possible starting hand?

What if all 7 cards were selectable, and you could send as many as you want back into the deck once, to draw that many cards off the top? (Like Hearthstone). How powerful would that be in limited with 40 card decks? Do both players equally benefit from this?

If you "fix" the consistency by reducing the variance, and not requiring sacrifice, are you cheapening the experience for some players?

My answer to the above is yes. There are many many games where a player is already at a disadvantage. Their deck is simply not as good against their opponents. It might be a rush deck vs. a control deck with a bad win-rate %, it might be a limited deck where they just were not able to grab cards that were as good or synergistic. The RNG in this game is what allows them to have a chance. If you reduce the RNG by allowing early game adjustments with zero sacrifice, you give 1 player an advantage, every time.

I don't think it's a bad thing personally. If a deck isn't good against another top level deck, than the meta adjusts and people play something more consistent. Again, all FFG card games have a free mulligan and the issue you are describing is irrelevant. People will gravitate towards winning decks regardless of the situation. And if a deck isn't good against certain match ups unless the opponent draws bad, then that sounds like a bad deck to me and the player should be playing something else anyway.

loopholist3
05-29-2015, 11:35 AM
Deep enough in the thread that I don't expect this to be read, but here is stats anyways.

a) I'll define this as 6 shards or more by turn 5, playing first (kind of a light definition of flood, but you only have 22 shards, so ...): 15.5%
b) 1 Shard opening hand: 15.7%
c) Chance for 2-3 shards of the same color in your opening hand (I don't know how to define 'color you need'): 20.9%
d) 1 of each, no shards for 5 draws: 1.2%

Chance at least 1 of these events occur: 52.2% (and yes, that includes the fact that both a and c can happen to you)

Figured I would do a post for a standard 25 shard/duel shard deck:

a) 7 shards or more by turn 5, playing first (harder definition for higher shard deck): 14.5%
b) 1 Shard opening hand: 10.5%
c) Chance for 2-3 shards of the same color in your opening hand (using 4 duel shards): 12.3%
d) 1 of each (or a duel), no shards for 5 draws: .85%

Chance at least 1 of these events occur: 38.1%

nicosharp
05-29-2015, 11:38 AM
I don't think it's a bad thing personally. If a deck isn't good against another top level deck, than the meta adjusts and people play something more consistent. Again, all FFG card games have a free mulligan and the issue you are describing is irrelevant. People will gravitate towards winning decks regardless of the situation. And if a deck isn't good against certain match ups unless the opponent draws bad, then that sounds like a bad deck to me and the player should be playing something else anyway.
I think part of the 'magic' (pardon the pun) in this system is that it allows 'fun' in the form of 'bad & not meta' to achieve wins.
It allows luck to play more of a role in success. People can gravitate to whatever they want competitively, but to (quoting Alucard) "live the dream" is an enjoyment and experience players should not be forced to avoid. I feel like the current system allows more room for silly and fun to work even when it's determined to be bad statistically.

Quantius
05-29-2015, 11:39 AM
I can perfect the arena 9 of 10 times with my deck and the time i lose is mostly because of Xarlox being lucky... RNG is just being true RNG in this game rather than artificial RNG in most other card games.

The problem is the human brain can't handle randomness properly as it always searches for a pattern to something.

I don't really see the problem when you can counter the RNG by proper deckbuilding 99% of the time.

Can you post or link to somewhere you've posted this deck? I've yet to have a perfect arena run despite trying just about every deck listed in the Strategy and Decklists forum that claims perfect runs (yes that includes many variants of the dwarf deck), I absolutely cannot get 20 games in a row without terrible shard screw. If you have a deck that can run it perfect 9/10 times, then it isn't outside of the realm of reason that I can run it 10 times and maybe get a perfect run.

Koz
05-29-2015, 11:39 AM
Indeed. I don't play either net runner or game of thrones regularly. Sure they're fun one off games but I wouldn't play game after game of them. They aren't my bag, hex is. And as a competitive player if they added a free mulligan I'd definitely run less resources in my decks, because the chance for me to see the resources I need has increased, and I'd have more gas in the deck to deal with people that haven't made that change. Frankly the current values of resource flood and screw are acceptable to me.

Personally, I feel the opposite. I think Hex is fun as a time filler, but I'd rather go play an FFG card game any day. IMO those games are designed in such a way that skill and deck building have more emphasis than randomization. Hex 's randomization factor is a bit too high for me to take the game seriously as a "skill game". Sure, there is skill involved in Hex, not saying there isn't, it's just that skill here is weighed down a bit by a higher randomization factor than most other current card games on the market.

I guess I just prefer a game where my deck draws a bad hand about 5% of the time, rather than 15% of the time. Plus, in those other games that I draw a bad starting hand 5% of the time I can usually play through and possibly turn the game around. Good luck turning a game of Hex around if you draw 7+ shards in your first dozen cards while your opponent had even an average draw (unless they are a bad player or have a terrible deck). Or if you draw only 1 or 2 in your fist dozen.

nicosharp
05-29-2015, 11:41 AM
Can you post or link to somewhere you've posted this deck? I've yet to have a perfect arena run despite trying just about every deck listed in the Strategy and Decklists forum that claims perfect runs (yes that includes many variants of the dwarf deck), I absolutely cannot get 20 games in a row without terrible shard screw. If you have a deck that can run it perfect 9/10 times, then it isn't outside of the realm of reason that I can run it 10 times and maybe get a perfect run.
Look up my Ruby Orc deck. I can say I've perfected the last 9 out of 10 runs. 1 was just 1 loss, to an avalanche giant that uber combo'ed me.

AdamAoE2
05-29-2015, 11:44 AM
Look up my Ruby Orc deck. I can say I've perfected the last 9 out of 10 runs. 1 was just 1 loss, to an avalanche giant that uber combo'ed me.

Yeah, Mono-Ruby decks are the way to go if you're looking for perfect arena runs.

Koz
05-29-2015, 11:48 AM
I think part of the 'magic' (pardon the pun) in this system is that it allows 'fun' in the form of 'bad & not meta' to achieve wins.
It allows luck to play more of a role in success. People can gravitate to whatever they want competitively, but to (quoting Alucard) "live the dream" is an enjoyment and experience players should not be forced to avoid. I feel like the current system allows more room for silly and fun to work even when it's determined to be bad statistically.

Okay, I can see what you are saying and I agree that it's not a bad thing overall to have that element. I guess it's just the fact that losing a game because I've been shard screwed/flooded to be some of the most aggravating experiences I've ever had in gaming. It drives me NUTS. I think a big factor to that is it is such a slooooow process since you only draw one card a turn (by default). I just want to punch my computer when I'm 5+ turns into the game and I keep thinking that "the NEXT card will be a non-shard...I just KNOW it!" And then it isn't.... and then the one after it isn't either...and so on. It's like a slow-motion trainwreck that you think you can get back on the tracks on the next draw...but then don't.

It drives me crazy and that probably skews my perception of the whole experience a bit to be honest.

Phenteo
05-29-2015, 11:48 AM
Removed some of the more flaming posts. Let's keep it civil guys.

Koz
05-29-2015, 11:49 AM
Yeah, Mono-Ruby decks are the way to go if you're looking for perfect arena runs.

That or Bertram bot spam. That's a high success level deck too and I've had perfect clears with it

Gwaer
05-29-2015, 12:05 PM
Personally, I feel the opposite. I think Hex is fun as a time filler, but I'd rather go play an FFG card game any day. IMO those games are designed in such a way that skill and deck building have more emphasis than randomization. Hex 's randomization factor is a bit too high for me to take the game seriously as a "skill game". Sure, there is skill involved in Hex, not saying there isn't, it's just that skill here is weighed down a bit by a higher randomization factor than most other current card games on the market.

I guess I just prefer a game where my deck draws a bad hand about 5% of the time, rather than 15% of the time. Plus, in those other games that I draw a bad starting hand 5% of the time I can usually play through and possibly turn the game around. Good luck turning a game of Hex around if you draw 7+ shards in your first dozen cards while your opponent had even an average draw (unless they are a bad player or have a terrible deck). Or if you draw only 1 or 2 in your fist dozen.

And that's perfectly acceptable. People enjoy different levels of variance. But as I say often. I'm not going onto those websites and forums and campaigning to make their games more like what I want at the expense of your enjoyment of those games. I like them for what they are and I love hex for what it is.

Svenn
05-29-2015, 12:13 PM
I don't think it's a bad thing personally. If a deck isn't good against another top level deck, than the meta adjusts and people play something more consistent. Again, all FFG card games have a free mulligan and the issue you are describing is irrelevant. People will gravitate towards winning decks regardless of the situation. And if a deck isn't good against certain match ups unless the opponent draws bad, then that sounds like a bad deck to me and the player should be playing something else anyway.
To be fair, all FFG games have "1 free mulligan... and no possible mulligan past that". You're stuck with your second hand. That's a very different mulligan system.

Koz
05-29-2015, 12:20 PM
To be fair, all FFG games have "1 free mulligan... and no possible mulligan past that". You're stuck with your second hand. That's a very different mulligan system.

Oh for sure, it's definitely different, I just prefer that system over the Hex/Magic one because it reduces the swingyness of the opening hand.

Still, Hex could implement a version of this rule with minimal impact I would think. As I've suggested before, even a rule of "if you have <2 shards or >5 shards your first mulligan is free". That way it's not a mulligan with no restrictions, just a "free" mulligan for those cases where your hand is really bad

Svenn
05-29-2015, 12:25 PM
Can you post or link to somewhere you've posted this deck? I've yet to have a perfect arena run despite trying just about every deck listed in the Strategy and Decklists forum that claims perfect runs (yes that includes many variants of the dwarf deck), I absolutely cannot get 20 games in a row without terrible shard screw. If you have a deck that can run it perfect 9/10 times, then it isn't outside of the realm of reason that I can run it 10 times and maybe get a perfect run.

Btw, if you're going for the perfect sleeves you can skip Tier 1 and still get them, so it's only 15 games.

This is going to come off the wrong way and I have no idea of your skill level and this isn't directed at you Quantius but a general observation, but this is also something I think people don't pay attention to when they talk about skill in Hex and how RNG determines too much. I've seen good players take less than optimal decks and utterly demolish the arena. I've seen bad players netdeck top tier decks and fail miserably. Hell, I've netdecked a tourney winning deck to take into a Constructed tournament and did horrible myself. I've seen people post about having trouble with the starter trials while some players rolled through with no deck modifications to the starter with no trouble at all.

All of this is to simply point out that while RNG definitely plays a role in Hex there is a LOT of skill involved. When these threads pop up, people tend to put all the blame on RNG despite all this evidence.

Svenn
05-29-2015, 12:26 PM
Oh for sure, it's definitely different, I just prefer that system over the Hex/Magic one because it reduces the swingyness of the opening hand.

Still, Hex could implement a version of this rule with minimal impact I would think. As I've suggested before, even a rule of "if you have <2 shards or >5 shards your first mulligan is free". That way it's not a mulligan with no restrictions, just a "free" mulligan for those cases where your hand is really bad

Which promotes running fewer resources to take advantage of the free mulligan. It's a change in balance.

Sparrow
05-29-2015, 12:29 PM
Can you post or link to somewhere you've posted this deck? I've yet to have a perfect arena run despite trying just about every deck listed in the Strategy and Decklists forum that claims perfect runs (yes that includes many variants of the dwarf deck), I absolutely cannot get 20 games in a row without terrible shard screw. If you have a deck that can run it perfect 9/10 times, then it isn't outside of the realm of reason that I can run it 10 times and maybe get a perfect run.
I've been playing a saph/ruby dwarf/bot deck that does perfect runs most of the time, not quite 90% though. It routinely wins with only 1 shard in play. It's a tweaked version of the deck listed here: http://forums.cryptozoic.com/showthread.php?t=42215&p=478326&viewfull=1#post478326

I've got an extra Tinkerer's Robes if you need one. Just msg me in game.

magic_gazz
05-29-2015, 12:29 PM
All FFG card games have a free mulligan and the games play just fine and are in fact extremely popular, especially Netrunner and Game of Thrones. So I find your claim a bit off considering there is ample evidence that one free mulligan doesn't ruin game balance.

And I'm not sure that people would run less shards with one free mulligan, people don't run less resource generators in FFG's games than they would in any other game, so I'm not sure why people would here. Some might and try and be risky about it, but so what? I would like to run fewer shards to be honest. Shards are necessary, but they are boring. If I had more deck space for troops & spells, I'd be happy to have it.

And lastly, I find your claims that the system is "optimal" to be a bit of a stretch considering there are many, many cards games that have come out since Magic that have alternate resource systems that reduce the variability of the swingy draw. Netrunner was created by Richard Garfield just like Magic was and he created an alternate resource system for that game. Apparently he learned from Magic's shortcomings...too bad Hex didn't.

What happens in a FFG game when you take your 1 mulligan and then draw a bad hand? Seems you would be screwed, same as having a bad 7 and getting a bad 6. EXCEPT in Hex I can go to 5 and still win.

How competitive are these FFG games? Do they cater to the competitive crowd or is it a more casual thing?

You cant just say X is better than Y without looking at all the angles.

magic_gazz
05-29-2015, 12:32 PM
In regards to Arena, get yourself equipment.

I found it hard to perfect without equipment but the equipment makes the decks more resistant to bad draws.

Lots of people on Orcs or Dwarves for speed, but mono diamond is pretty good too. I cant remember the list off the top of my head though.

loopholist3
05-29-2015, 12:35 PM
Oh for sure, it's definitely different, I just prefer that system over the Hex/Magic one because it reduces the swingyness of the opening hand.

Still, Hex could implement a version of this rule with minimal impact I would think. As I've suggested before, even a rule of "if you have <2 shards or >5 shards your first mulligan is free". That way it's not a mulligan with no restrictions, just a "free" mulligan for those cases where your hand is really bad

The problem is that the deck that most recently won the fate cup was a 20 shard deck. The deck probably kept 1 shard hands all of the time. Your solution needs the free mulligan range to be variable based off of the number of shards in your deck, but then it starts to get hard to explain it to new players.

Koz
05-29-2015, 12:36 PM
Which promotes running fewer resources to take advantage of the free mulligan. It's a change in balance.

I don't think it would be as significant as you believe. I haven't noticed people running a lower percentage of resource accelerators/generators in FFG games than they would in any other, free mulligan or no. I mean the idea of a free mulligan is to minimize a bad first hand. If you play with a non-optimal amount of shards you are increasing your odds of a bad first hand. Taking a free mulligan doesn't really mitigate the fact that your deck isn't optimal because when you draw your second hand you have the exact same odds of drawing a bad hand that you had with the first one, because your deck isn't running the proper amount of resources.

Plus, what would it hurt to try it out for awhile and see how it plays? It's not like they couldn't change it back if it didn't work out. I think what most surprises me is that there seems to be a lot of people who just dismiss the idea out of hand without even wanting to see how it affects game balance before passing judgment.

Aradon
05-29-2015, 12:37 PM
What happens in a FFG game when you take your 1 mulligan and then draw a bad hand? Seems you would be screwed, same as having a bad 7 and getting a bad 6. EXCEPT in Hex I can go to 5 and still win.

How competitive are these FFG games? Do they cater to the competitive crowd or is it a more casual thing?

You cant just say X is better than Y without looking at all the angles.

Android Netrunner at the very least has a pretty strong competitive scene. It's not as big as MtG, but they take it pretty seriously, and FFG does a great job supporting the game. In my limited experience with it, most of it comes down to understanding the meta and building your deck appropriately, because most cards have obvious strengths and very obvious weaknesses.

Edit: In response to Koz's post above, we're pretty sure a free mulligan is something the devs tested when they were still building the game. They said they examined this issue extensively before settling on the current iteration. So, a lot of the people posting don't feel we need to try it out because it's already been tried.

nicosharp
05-29-2015, 12:39 PM
In regards to Arena, get yourself equipment.

I found it hard to perfect without equipment but the equipment makes the decks more resistant to bad draws.

Lots of people on Orcs or Dwarves for speed, but mono diamond is pretty good too. I cant remember the list off the top of my head though.
4x Angel of Dawn
4x Prot Defender (+1/+1) + Chest Equip
4x Shinobi
4x Shield Trainer - Trinket Equip
4x Living Totem - Head + Feet Equip
4x Inner Conflict - Weapon Equip
4x Solitary Exile
3x Spearcliff cloud knight
3x Droo's Walker
3x Noble Heart - Hand Equip
23x Diamond Shard / play dimmid

Koz
05-29-2015, 12:43 PM
What happens in a FFG game when you take your 1 mulligan and then draw a bad hand? Seems you would be screwed, same as having a bad 7 and getting a bad 6. EXCEPT in Hex I can go to 5 and still win.

How competitive are these FFG games? Do they cater to the competitive crowd or is it a more casual thing?

You cant just say X is better than Y without looking at all the angles.

FFG games are extremely popular. Their booth at Gen Con probably has three times the people moving through it that Wizards of the Coast's does. And their tournament scene is very, very competitive.

If you mulligan in an FFG you have to keep your second hand, period. It makes for very interesting decision making to say the least.

Anyway, I've never said they need to copy FFG's model exactly anyway, I've just said I think they should tweak the mulligan system to something a bit different than what it is now

Sparrow
05-29-2015, 12:43 PM
Taking a free mulligan doesn't really mitigate the fact that your deck isn't optimal because when you draw your second hand you have the exact same odds of drawing a bad hand that you had with the first one, because your deck isn't running the proper amount of resources.
That's true for any mulligan type situation. The deck composition doesn't change because you get to draw again. The correct way to look at is to consider the frequency of an acceptable hand given the mulligan conditions, before the first hand is dealt.

Zophie
05-29-2015, 12:43 PM
In regards to Arena, get yourself equipment.

I found it hard to perfect without equipment but the equipment makes the decks more resistant to bad draws.

Yup, after the first tier the Arena difficulty is definitely balanced with Equipment in mind. Once I got all the pieces I needed for my decks I noticed a significant increase in my chances to run Perfect.

Koz
05-29-2015, 12:46 PM
4x Angel of Dawn
4x Prot Defender (+1/+1) + Chest Equip
4x Shinobi
4x Shield Trainer - Trinket Equip
4x Living Totem - Head + Feet Equip
4x Inner Conflict - Weapon Equip
4x Solitary Exile
3x Spearcliff cloud knight
3x Droo's Walker
3x Noble Heart - Hand Equip
23x Diamond Shard / play dimmid

Wow, that's an expensive list! I'm sure it would be good, but I think the mono Ruby Orc deck and the Bertram bot spam decks are so popular because they are very effective yet relatively inexpensive.

nicosharp
05-29-2015, 12:56 PM
Wow, that's an expensive list! I'm sure it would be good, but I think the mono Ruby Orc deck and the Bertram bot spam decks are so popular because they are very effective yet relatively inexpensive.
It's very good, but due to the price point I do not preach its success to the masses :)

Koz
05-29-2015, 01:01 PM
Android Netrunner at the very least has a pretty strong competitive scene. It's not as big as MtG, but they take it pretty seriously, and FFG does a great job supporting the game. In my limited experience with it, most of it comes down to understanding the meta and building your deck appropriately, because most cards have obvious strengths and very obvious weaknesses.

Edit: In response to Koz's post above, we're pretty sure a free mulligan is something the devs tested when they were still building the game. They said they examined this issue extensively before settling on the current iteration. So, a lot of the people posting don't feel we need to try it out because it's already been tried.

Well I would counter with "tried by whom?" Putting it to the test by letting the entire community try it out would be the way to determine if it's good or not and if it would have any affect on deck building as a whole. I mean...the game is still in beta right? Why not test run a few new systems before the game goes live...

Plus, I find that their assertion that they "tried" it to be a bit suspect, just because I find it awfully coincidental that their mulligan system mirrors MtG's mulligan system exactly....

But who knows, maybe they really did test it extensively...but my skeptic meter is redlining on that claim

Aradon
05-29-2015, 01:14 PM
Well I would counter with "tried by whom?" Putting it to the test by letting the entire community try it out would be the way to determine if it's good or not and if it would have any affect on deck building as a whole. I mean...the game is still in beta right? Why not test run a few new systems before the game goes live...

Plus, I find that their assertion that they "tried" it to be a bit suspect, just because I find it awfullycoincidental that their mulligan system mirrors MtG's mulligan system exactly....

But who knows, maybe they really did test it extensively...but my skeptic meter is redlining on that claim

Personally, I trust the game developers to have a better feel for what makes the game just right than the community at large, but I don't think that's an opinion everyone shares. As for being still in beta, there's bound to be responses that it's too late in beta to change a fundamental like the resource system. Personally, I think it could stand the strain of shifting to a free mulligan if that were indeed the correct design choice. At worst, the first three sets would be mildly out of balance, but it's not like combo's tearing the meta apart right now anyways, and going forward things would be 'fixed.'

I don't share your suspicions about their testing, though. I think it's similar because MtG has a good thing that's stood the test of time.

IronPheasant
05-29-2015, 01:22 PM
I mean...the game is still in beta right? Why not test run a few new systems before the game goes live...

Considering the $$$ invested already, they're not going to make any changes to the core game. I could offer some reasons against the single free mulligan idea specifically:

* Hex is basically trying to undercut MTG on price and outperform in software quality and how fun the free to play option is. Most of their customers are likely from the pool of MTG players that want something only slightly different. (Nothing wrong with this, cloning good things is how we get even better things. I know I love having wheels on my car.)

* The mana system is.... extremely deviant. About 5% of the time you get into a game and the result is "you don't even get to play." A one mulligan only option brings that up closer to 7%.

I'm not a fan of a resource system that snorts and makes ~10% of the hands you draw unplayable either, but this is Hex. If we don't like it, we have to do what everyone else does: make our own game. On the moon. With blackjack. And hookers... You know what, forget the hookers.


similar

"identical"

Aradon
05-29-2015, 01:43 PM
"identical"

I stand by "similar," especially if we're arguing semantics.

IzHaN80
05-31-2015, 04:27 PM
Today it's been a day of suxx0r again. Just to mention this last game, i open with 1 shard, with 3 troops that cost 1 shard, 1x crimson clarity and 1x brutal commander. Guess what. Turn 13, still no shards, and Sniper beat my ass out with his pets. GG. The other games, either i get flooded or shard screweded constantly with 21 shard on deck. Lolz, ty RNG, you truly suck and make my day.

Xenavire
05-31-2015, 04:33 PM
Today it's been a day of suxx0r again. Just to mention this last game, i open with 1 shard, with 3 troops that cost 1 shard, 1x crimson clarity and 1x brutal commander. Guess what. Turn 13, still no shards, and Sniper beat my ass out with his pets. GG. The other games, either i get flooded or shard screweded constantly with 21 shard on deck. Lolz, ty RNG, you truly suck and make my day.

You should be expecting screw with 21 shards, and it is rarely good to keep a 1 shard hand (and probably the worst possible move when you only have 20 shards left in the deck, too much risk.)

I actually made a deck today that is fun but not all that reliable, with 22 shards and a way to ramp, and I would definitely not keep a 1 shard hand even with all my 1 cost cards. Something to think about, mulligans are very important to learn.

IzHaN80
05-31-2015, 05:14 PM
You should be expecting screw with 21 shards, and it is rarely good to keep a 1 shard hand (and probably the worst possible move when you only have 20 shards left in the deck, too much risk.)

I actually made a deck today that is fun but not all that reliable, with 22 shards and a way to ramp, and I would definitely not keep a 1 shard hand even with all my 1 cost cards. Something to think about, mulligans are very important to learn.Well actually i would keep 1 shard hand, because logic is the next: I do have 3x troops that costs just 1 shard, i did draw seven cards, so the odds i get a shard in the next turn or another is very high likely, plus having a Crimson Clarity in hand with a Brutal Commander next to it, its a risk worth of taking, a lot of times i've had success but lately i've been running games where i would get 10 shards on top of my deck or none at all during 12-13 turns, or 4-5 shards start with useless cards no troops at all, etc.

This is actually the stats of my deck: Arena's Deck - Orcs Mono Ruby (http://hex.tcgbrowser.com/#!/deck=20758)

Resource screw/flood:
Resources in hand:
0: 3.98%
1: 17.74%
2: 31.31%
3: 28.33%
4: 14.16%
5: 3.9%
6: 0.55%
7: 0.03%

Key Drop Slot: 2.23

Screw: 10.17%
Flood: 15.31%

Acceptable: 74.51%

Xenavire
05-31-2015, 05:23 PM
If I am understanding your math here, that 10% for screw is off keeping a 1 shard hand, correct? A 1/10 chance is still moderately risking (meaning 1 in every 10 games you keep a 1 shard hand, on average, it will be an autoloss.) I don't see any reason to think this is anything but a bad hand and a bad draw.

And even with the Crimson Clarity, I wouldn't have kept that. The only time I keep 1 shard hands is if I have a way to produce more resources without a topdeck (howling braves for example.)

Diesbudt
05-31-2015, 05:33 PM
Well actually i would keep 1 shard hand, because logic is the next: I do have 3x troops that costs just 1 shard, i did draw seven cards, so the odds i get a shard in the next turn or another is very high likely, plus having a Crimson Clarity in hand with a Brutal Commander next to it, its a risk worth of taking, a lot of times i've had success but lately i've been running games where i would get 10 shards on top of my deck or none at all during 12-13 turns, or 4-5 shards start with useless cards no troops at all, etc.

This is actually the stats of my deck: Arena's Deck - Orcs Mono Ruby (http://hex.tcgbrowser.com/#!/deck=20758)

Resource screw/flood:
Resources in hand:
0: 3.98%
1: 17.74%
2: 31.31%
3: 28.33%
4: 14.16%
5: 3.9%
6: 0.55%
7: 0.03%

Key Drop Slot: 2.23

Screw: 10.17%
Flood: 15.31%

Acceptable: 74.51%

Did you factor in mulligans? Or Better deck building?

I took a decent deck of mine half a year ago and sat around a while for a few weekends and ran thousands upon thousands of test draws as I watched movies through the client mulliganning as I would mulligan. Claiming X and Y was Flood / Screw and even test drawing first 4 cards (for total of 11) to see where I stood.

After all my testing my screw rate was 7%, and flood was 9%. Which is pretty good, and even when i play I do not lose to RNG screw/flood often.

The best 2 skills to reduce RNG variance as much as possible is deck building and when to mulligan. This is what separates players skill wise more so than playing once someone understands the basic mechanics fully.

IzHaN80
05-31-2015, 06:08 PM
Did you factor in mulligans? Or Better deck building?

I took a decent deck of mine half a year ago and sat around a while for a few weekends and ran thousands upon thousands of test draws as I watched movies through the client mulliganning as I would mulligan. Claiming X and Y was Flood / Screw and even test drawing first 4 cards (for total of 11) to see where I stood.

After all my testing my screw rate was 7%, and flood was 9%. Which is pretty good, and even when i play I do not lose to RNG screw/flood often.

The best 2 skills to reduce RNG variance as much as possible is deck building and when to mulligan. This is what separates players skill wise more so than playing once someone understands the basic mechanics fully.Well, if you took a look at the deck, this comes from Nicosharp's post, Orc Mono Ruby Deck which seems to be one of the most consistent/fast decks out there, so i don't know i didn't start making mine yet.

loopholist3
06-01-2015, 08:11 AM
If I am understanding your math here, that 10% for screw is off keeping a 1 shard hand, correct? A 1/10 chance is still moderately risking (meaning 1 in every 10 games you keep a 1 shard hand, on average, it will be an autoloss.) I don't see any reason to think this is anything but a bad hand and a bad draw.

And even with the Crimson Clarity, I wouldn't have kept that. The only time I keep 1 shard hands is if I have a way to produce more resources without a topdeck (howling braves for example.)

Just to make IzHaN80 not feel alone, I think he did the right thing keeping that 1 shard hand (expecially if he was on the draw). Whether his deck is good or not is dependent on the deck list, but you can build a deck with the optimal number of shards being 21. After all, a 20 shard deck won the fate cup, but none of its cards costed more than 2. If your understanding of his math is right and he auto-loses 10% of games where he starts with 1 shard, and starting with one shard is a 17.74% chance, then he has a 1.7% chance of auto-losing, which is usually seen as an acceptable risk when deck building. You have a 2.38% chance of needing to mulligan twice in a 25 shard deck if your only condition for mulliganing is 0 or 1 shard.

Xenavire
06-01-2015, 08:21 AM
Just to make IzHaN80 not feel alone, I think he did the right thing keeping that 1 shard hand (expecially if he was on the draw). Whether his deck is good or not is dependent on the deck list, but you can build a deck with the optimal number of shards being 21. After all, a 20 shard deck won the fate cup, but none of its cards costed more than 2. If your understanding of his math is right and he auto-loses 10% of games where he starts with 1 shard, and starting with one shard is a 17.74% chance, then he has a 1.7% chance of auto-losing, which is usually seen as an acceptable risk when deck building. You have a 2.38% chance of needing to mulligan twice in a 25 shard deck if your only condition for mulliganing is 0 or 1 shard.

It would be an acceptable risk in a Bo3 match. Not in PvE, where a loss ruins a perfect run, etc.

It is a problem of circumstance, not deckbuilding. I think the deck is fine, but in that circumstance I wouldn't take the risk if I was aiming for a perfect run. And that is the key here.

nicosharp
06-01-2015, 08:50 AM
Well, if you took a look at the deck, this comes from Nicosharp's post, Orc Mono Ruby Deck which seems to be one of the most consistent/fast decks out there, so i don't know i didn't start making mine yet.
But you dropped a shard in an already low shard count deck :(

Turtlewing
06-01-2015, 10:11 AM
Personally, I feel the opposite. I think Hex is fun as a time filler, but I'd rather go play an FFG card game any day. IMO those games are designed in such a way that skill and deck building have more emphasis than randomization. Hex 's randomization factor is a bit too high for me to take the game seriously as a "skill game". Sure, there is skill involved in Hex, not saying there isn't, it's just that skill here is weighed down a bit by a higher randomization factor than most other current card games on the market.

I guess I just prefer a game where my deck draws a bad hand about 5% of the time, rather than 15% of the time. Plus, in those other games that I draw a bad starting hand 5% of the time I can usually play through and possibly turn the game around. Good luck turning a game of Hex around if you draw 7+ shards in your first dozen cards while your opponent had even an average draw (unless they are a bad player or have a terrible deck). Or if you draw only 1 or 2 in your fist dozen.

From what I can tell, suggesting Hex adopt an FFG game mechanic is akin to suggesting the Go-Fish adopt the "every player plays the dealer individually" mechanic from casino Blackjack on the basis that they're both card games and counting cards is necessary for optimal play in both.

It could probably be done, but might not make any sense in context due to differing design goals and constraints.

Vorpal
06-01-2015, 10:18 AM
To be fair, all FFG games have "1 free mulligan... and no possible mulligan past that". You're stuck with your second hand. That's a very different mulligan system.

I almost think it's better.

As it is, no matter how bad your hand is, you can mulligan into a worse one, because you drop a card.

Mahes
06-01-2015, 10:42 AM
I almost think it's better.

As it is, no matter how bad your hand is, you can mulligan into a worse one, because you drop a card.

I actually think the Mulligan system could be tweaked a bit. It really can make a large difference if you go down a card. It makes an even larger difference if you go down 2 cards. The problem is when they release a card that works so well with another card that the 2 cards can win you a game if drawn. Then players just mulligan down until they get at least one, if not both of the cards. This has occurred in magic with particular combos. That said, I wonder if the system would work better with one free 7 card mulligan. Since both players get it, both players can choose whether or not to risk attempting to improve their hand. What that would do is help to alleviate some games where players do not really get to play. I am sure this continues to be discussed in office as the current random system can be daunting for a new player.

The Irony is that with new players, the very luck that enables them to enjoy themselves is directly tied into whether or not this game grows at the rate needed too survive. This means that this company is also relying on the random system. Kind of scary if you really think about it.

Svenn
06-01-2015, 02:24 PM
I almost think it's better.

As it is, no matter how bad your hand is, you can mulligan into a worse one, because you drop a card.

And in that system you have a not so great hand and mulligan, and you get a terrible hand. Now you can't mulligan again. You're stuck with the terrible hand. It simply encourages people keeping less than optimal hands so they don't get stuck with awful hands instead.


That said, I wonder if the system would work better with one free 7 card mulligan. Since both players get it, both players can choose whether or not to risk attempting to improve their hand. What that would do is help to alleviate some games where players do not really get to play.
This has been brought up and discussed. A free mulligan has lots of problems, including shifting the balance in favor of certain archetypes (combo would LOVE this).


I am sure this continues to be discussed in office as the current random system can be daunting for a new player. Actually, I'm pretty sure they aren't discussing this in the office as it's set and they are happy with where it is. They've told us this multiple times.

Diesbudt
06-01-2015, 02:34 PM
Actually, I'm pretty sure they aren't discussing this in the office as it's set and they are happy with where it is. They've told us this multiple times.

This. They have stated they like where it is at. They have tested many methods such as free mulligan one time before losing a card and so on. They ended up with the system they have because they felt it was more balanced and better for the game they want to make. That is kind of the end of the debate there unless they come out and say otherwise.

While I do not agree with them, I am okay with it because I can see how a free mulligan would wreck parts of the game.

Diesbudt
06-01-2015, 02:37 PM
From what I can tell, suggesting Hex adopt an FFG game mechanic is akin to suggesting the Go-Fish adopt the "every player plays the dealer individually" mechanic from casino Blackjack on the basis that they're both card games and counting cards is necessary for optimal play in both.

It could probably be done, but might not make any sense in context due to differing design goals and constraints.

Hmmm.... HMMMMMM.... Go-fish game in a casino... I like it.

Turtlewing
06-01-2015, 02:57 PM
I almost think it's better.

As it is, no matter how bad your hand is, you can mulligan into a worse one, because you drop a card.

A single free mulligan can also have you mulligan into an objectively worse hand in most cases as well (you'd have to have drawn the single worst hand possible to make the difference matter).

Fundamentally both a singe free mulligan and the paris mulligan operate the same way. You can reshuffle and redraw your hand at a cost. The difference is the former costs you your 1 per game mulligan chance, the later costs you 1 starting card in hand.

I'd personally argue that if the make any change to the mulligan system it should be letting you draw 7 then select and shuffle X cards into your deck where x is how many times you've mulled. Letting you see 7 cards but only keep 7-x would still impose a cost but would remove the worse odds of getting early plays from the redraw.