Random chance

8 posts

Flag Post

For the past 2 months, I have been on and off this game because of this particular mechanic in this game. Random chance. And now, I’m considering giving up entirely because the strategy in this game is non-existent when it comes to random chance.

1) Flying
This mechanic specifically ticks me off. It could be better executed by giving melee attackers no chance what so ever, and ranged and magic have a 100% chance.

2) Reflect
Just reflect the damned magic attack. Even better, make it comparable to Counter.

3) Counter
Just counter…

3) Ranged+Armor
Ranged attacks should either be dodged completely 100% of the time, or it hits. I prefer if it hits. What makes it miss compared to a melee attack?

4) Thrash
Let me select the monster I want to target. Its annoying when Thrash targets a flying monster, which will obviously be dodged.

5) Entangled
Just entangle them? Maybe just disable flying and not remove the monsters next turn.

6) Stun
Just stun them. Add a number indicating how many times it can be used, or just make it a 1 time use only.

These are fine with random chance: Chance, Critical, Opportunity

If none of these are considered, consider making everything random chance and see how strategic the game gets. PS, it won’t.

Removing the random chance effect would give each card a real purpose, and will make the game extremely strategic. Players would have a fun time perfecting their deck and discovering the perfect strategy to defeat the swarms, instead of being forced to avoid random effect cards and focus on getting cards that have effects that don’t randomly activate.

Oh, and allow the use of selecting which creature is healed. I know this isn’t random, but it can add a bit of strategy if I can select a monster to be healed. There have been many times where a monster was healed, but could survive an extra turn, compared to a monster that’ll die next turn.

 
Flag Post

Removing the random makes game maybe a little bit more fair but less fun.
With some random aspects weaker decks can have chance with epic-rare decks and it’s good.
Counting probability is kind of strategic too….

…and removing the random won’t make game extramely strategic … it will just make bigger gap between paying players and no-paying players – it’s the fact ! You can be super smart, have great strategy and evolving your card for long … and some dumb player pay for a epic lvl 5 cards and you can put your strategic into your a..

IMHO Random is mandatory in this game.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by weshu:

Removing the random makes game maybe a little bit more fair but less fun.
With some random aspects weaker decks can have chance with epic-rare decks and it’s good.
Counting probability is kind of strategic too….

…and removing the random won’t make game extramely strategic … it will just make bigger gap between paying players and no-paying players – it’s the fact ! You can be super smart, have great strategy and evolving your card for long … and some dumb player pay for a epic lvl 5 cards and you can put your strategic into your a..

IMHO Random is mandatory in this game.

…It isn’t fun failing a ranged attack 20 times in a row, it pisses me off. Counting probability isn’t strategy, its pure luck. The effect is strategic, not the probability. High risk investments is luck, but if you know the product might do well, then its strategic.

Uhh, it’ll tighten the gap if probability was removed. The older effects would actually stand a chance (see how I use ‘chance’? Chance still exists even if it didn’t exist) against the newer effects found in expansion 3. The newer cards have barely any probable chance and have WAAAAY over powered effects. Long time players have a severe advantage against new-comers.

 
Flag Post

I see your point. I hate when I can’t hit flying 5-10 times in a row … and it happens very ofen (such long series).
But to hit at least twice in a row – it’s like Christmas ! Rarely happen.

But in my opinion problem is with Random function … there is something just wrong with it !
And developers should work on it a little bit more.
Too many times there is the same result in a row (it’s sometimes like against the probability).
And it’s not only my opinion.

 
Flag Post

Ok, I have some comments:

1) Some chance is needed, adds diversity to the game. Many other ccg’s and tcg’s have “flip a coin” mechanisms and such. And if probability is programmed right, the chances of dodging fly (or other 50% event) 5 times on a row are only once every 32 tries (once every 1024 for 10 in a row), so…

2) I don’t like slim chances, like 25% critical. Nobody counts on it, it’s just something that annoys people when it happens. I prefer 75%, or even 50% is ok. And someone said it on chat and I agree, we should have other probabilities, like 67%.

3) Heal being non targeted is ok IMO. You just have to understand how it works and act accordingly, like saccing a more damaged monster if you need the other one healed.

4) All chance events affect everyone equaly, so it’s fair by definition. You’ll benefited sometimes, and screwed on others, but on average you’ll do just ok.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by weshu:

I see your point. I hate when I can’t hit flying 5-10 times in a row … and it happens very ofen (such long series).
But to hit at least twice in a row – it’s like Christmas ! Rarely happen.

Not saying it doesn’t happen, but I tested melee vs. flying 51 times, it hit 26 times and missed 25, very balanced. And the longest streak was 4 hits, and 3 misses.

 
Flag Post

I start counting… maybe I just have such radiculous unluck…

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by weshu:

I start counting… maybe I just have such radiculous unluck…

Very likely it’s just confirmation bias, weshu. You tend to notice when you get unlucky streaks, but if you collated all the random times you did hit and add them together you’ll find it approximates 50%.

The human brain is funny like that, and leads to false crying about ‘broken rng’ in lots of online MMOs.

Having no access to Dev code or confirmation, I can’t confirm this, ofc, but I did run a test on Reflect across 200 samples which made me reasonably confident that the stated % is accurate.