Recent posts by DrFaustus on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Getting Bored? Try THIS!

Originally posted by Shadowhopeful:

Arena guyz… arena.

Well, then the devs should add an option to challenge a certain person for arena play (creating a game, waiting for player [name] or something). Just allow the battle, no ranking, no rewards, so no exploits. Just play for the sake of playing the game. It’s a pretty basic feature any PvP card-game should have, imo.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Moral reasons for why I'm leaving Tyrant

Oh, wow! really nice discussion I started there. Thanks for the good byes so far.

There is a lot of stuff I want to comment on, so WARNING, WALL OF TEXT INCOMING:

Originally posted by darkfang77:

who is this guy?


I’m a nobody. A free player, started before blight expansion came out, mostly for badges. Got into a casual faction (Knight Sabres), because Tridents and Full power looked nice at the time. Got addicted, got into a more competetive facion (DCLXVI), but left when the wars became too intensive for my liking. Been a drifter for a while, ended up in Pendulum (strongest lvl 5 faction ever), when conquest first came out. Then I silently left Tyrant before first batch of buffed cards, because I had no hope left for a better balance.
Came back about a month ago to see how stuff looks now. Played a bit in Casual Fridays, but the faction started to fall apart, I ended up being leader and organized a merger with Quick’N’Vicious.
Also:
Originally posted by elabear:

Bye. I remember you made a newbie guide that helped me a lot in my starter days. Thank you very much for your contribution.


Happy to hear it was of some use :-)

Originally posted by Pinchfire:

Nobody really cares that you quit.

I didn’t expect anyone to care. I simply intended to share my thoughts and maybe provoke some thoughts. 50 replys say “it worked”.

Now for the discussion:

Originally posted by taised:
Originally posted by DrFaustus:
b) I want an even playing field. That means, my card pool or character or race is just as good as the opponent’s. The player’s skill will decide the match, not the amount of grinding done before or the amount of cash played.

Well, this have to be wrong. I mean, in a game that last months or years, it is simply not possible that the player that started yesterday, once acquired the “skills” to play, can beat a player that plays from month. There should be a difference. Maybe you mean that not only the grinding is necessary, but you also need skills, in which case I completely agree.


Well. The game should be deep as in “lot’s of stuff to learn before you are good enough to play at top level”, thus including difficult decisions in the game-play. Sure, that means that there is some time required, before you reach the top. But that is not grinding. It is practicing, learning, reading guides and stuff. If you are good at it (talented), you can reach the top fast. If you are not and just “grind”, you never reach the top.

There is no need for the game to include artificial leveling to stop players from playing at a high level. Actually, it is actually harming the game, as new players cannot even practice for top level play, if you withhold the tools necessary for top-level play from them.

As examples, chess or poker players play those games for their life time (without any expansions, ever). Imagine Chess, where one player has to play without a queen before he reaches a certain Elo-rating…

Originally posted by taised:

Anyway the pay per win model is at the moment the one that has the most diffusion. So maybe the problem is not on game creator who promotes this model, but in players who “like to win easily” paying real money to become stronger than others. Game creators just give what players want, if players like those kind of game, it’s probably a player problem.

Yeah, it’s mostly the players, or human nature, who is to blame. Hence, my moral decision: I don’t want that crap, so I stopp supporting it in any form.

Originally posted by Caad:

I’ve never heard of any TCG/CCG that works the way you’re proposing.

Yeah, CCG as in collecteble card game is not what I’m looking for. cusomizable card game would be nice thogh. But actually, any PvP strategy is fine.
Ever heard of Kongai? Elements comes pretty close, too.

Originally posted by IMBArathrum:

Look at League of Legends, for example. Games that allow for fair competition need support, but when future game developers see that only F2P-P2W games get successful, they won’t make any even-playfield games.

I don’t think I get this part. Is this claiming that LoL is P2W? (which is false)

I’m not claiming LoL is P2W. I know it is mostly about players skills. But it uses stuff that a competetive PvP game should NOT use: Forced grinding before you reach lvl 30 and thus the even playing-field, regular release of new content (for sale), instead of improving the existing balance, artificially disturbing teh balance to change the meta, etc. It’s not as bad as Tyrant, but the direction worries me.

Originally posted by testeria

There were and still are games without this mechanics. You buy the game and play it with other players who bought it. Costs are straight and there is no need for all this “fun pain” and grinding etc.

Exactly my point. There are good games with a one time cost (probably wouldn’t work for games that require a server to run, regular patches and stuff), or a fixed monthly fee or similar and then the devs focus on deliver top quality, instead of thinking about which mechanics could rise the revenue. Those games need support if we don’t want them to die out against the competition from p2w.

Originally posted by FlyingPachyderm:
http://www.kongregate.com/games/Guuji/godfield
Let me know if you find something more interesting.


Don’T have the time right now, but will check it out. Thanks.

BTW, I already have a perfect candidate for a game that matches all my criteria: Puzzle Strike at www.fantasystrike.com. 20 Characters, very good balanced. Free to play option (one random character available for free each day, plus one free game per day as any char). Monthly fee of 9$ to unlock all the content (plus 2 other games). Deck building done in-game. Lot’s of decissions and player interaction. Check it out.

There is some more stuff I could comment on. maybe tomorrow…

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Moral reasons for why I'm leaving Tyrant

A lot of guys leaving Tyrant post their reasons, which quite often come down to being “burned out from all the grinding”. When asked, what they will play next, many name another CCG. To me that’s pretty strange, because being burned out is a natural result of a CCG being mixed with the typical MMO-stuff. So I’ll do an analysis of the tricks that Tyrant uses, and that I will avoid in future games.

Why would you want to play a CCG?
It provides three different sources of fun:
1) Collecting stuff
2) Building decks
3) Actually playing the games (I’ll call that the gameplay)

Imo, (1) isn’t even a game. Humans tend to like collecting stuff, and I know I’m prone to that, once I start with something, but why should I bebothered with it, when I actually want to play? I am looking for games that are fun to play. So let’s look at the gameplay of Tyrant: It really is shallow:
In a single match I have to make at most 9 decissions, and most of those are trivial. The match is mostly predetermined by the cards in the decks. If one deck has simply better cards (eg. epic raid stuff against gold pack stuff), the outcome is clear, when the game starts. If both decks have cards of a similar quality, but one deck is build to counter the other one, it’s the same.

So the aspect that Tyrant focuses on is obviously the deck building. But how interesting is that? For missions, there is one specific deck to counter, but it’s played by a terrible AI (at random). The difficulty of later missions comes simply from overpowered commanders. Basically, beating a mission is a puzzle. Yet, unless you check the fansite, Tyrant won’t even show you what is in the deck before you play the mission for the first time and risk spending your energy just for the scouting. So, you check the fansite, which provides you with the deck (and an optional solution). But once you have your solution deck, you have to grind the mission 10 times (at energy costs up to 100, or 250 for side missions!). Which other puzzle game asks you to do that? Basically, you do the missions for the rewards and gold payout, so that’s boring grinding.

Do we have better deckbuilding-challanges on faction wars or conquest? I don’t think so. The balance of Tyrant is so poor, that typically there are at most 5 viable deck archetypes, with one or two dominating. The rest is simply not worth it. And it is not difficult to find out what those deck types are, because you run into them as defense decks and the tweaks to turn them into surge decks are usually quite predictable. Also, you can simply copy ideas from your faction mates.
So, the deckbuilding is done for a faction war. What do we do to win? Right: Grinding. But how interesting is it to find out, which faction brings out the higher activity?

On activity, energy and stamina
What are they good for? They restrict the amount of playing time you can do at a time. So, you experience that time as more valuable and come back more often. That’s a stupid psychological trick. I’d prefer a game that I can play for as long as I want and when I want. I want to decide when to play, not the energy bar. But once you are in a faction and you haven’t been on for 5 hours, your brain says: “your wasting pontential stamina (i.e. playing time); your faction might need your help in that war…”. That’s social preassure on top of that, to keep you in the game. It’s there to make you addicted, but without going through the process of designing a good game first.
The fallacy here goes like this: Some games are so good they make me addicted. Tyrant made me addicted, so it must be good. Right? NO! There are many other ways to cause addiction and Tyrant is very good at implementing those. Skinner Box-mechanics (see penny arcade: http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/the-skinner-box), for example.

Another stupid thing: Random Packs
Some reasons why selling stuff in random packs is bad from a different source:
newest Extra Credit episode (http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/collectable-games-part-1, http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/collectable-games-part-2)
summary:
1) have people buy shit they don’t want
2) …more than once
3) exploit gambling addicts
4) fool people into thinking stuff is worth something when it isn’t
5) exploit people liable to commit the sunk cost fallacy

As a further point, note that using random packs conceals the real cost of completing a given set of cards. When someone actually does the math on how much to spend (as here: http://www.kongregate.com/forums/65-tyrant/topics/365529-pack-calculations-average-cost-of-legendaries ), most people are shocked, how high the price actually is. Basically, random packs exploit the fact that the human brian is bad at dealing with probabilities.

What I want instead
There is more stuff I could point out, but I will stop analysing Tyrant here and instead state, what I will be looking for, when it comes to competetive multiplayer games:
a)I want the game to have meaningful decissions in the gameplay (so that strategy matters).
b) I want an even playing field. That means, my card pool or character or race is just as good as the opponent’s. The player’s skill will decide the match, not the amount of grinding done before or the amount of cash played.
c) I’m totally ok with the game costing money to play. But, the cost should be predictable (e.g. a fixed, monthly fee to unlock everything). It should not be possible to pay for an in-game advantage.

(b) and © used to be the norm before zynga and facebook games (think Star Craft, Street Fighter, Counter Strike), but now they seem to be dying out. Look at League of Legends, for example. Games that allow for fair competition need support, but when future game developers see that only F2P-P2W games get successful, they won’t make any even-playfield games.

That’s why it’s a moral decision for me to quit Tyrant (and anything similar): I do not want to support any game that uses the fraudulent business model; not even as a free player, who serves as a weak opponent for the playing players, or just as part of the community. I want future games to be good games at first and not to be build around a money making scheme.

PS:
Also, here:http://www.kongregate.com/forums/65-tyrant/topics/366280-what-motivates-to-you-to-play-this-game many players state that they keep playing tyrant only because of the other players (but not because they actually like tyrant anymore). Wouldn’t it make sense then, to quit tyrant together and find a new game to play? Obviously, you do not need tyrant for it’s chat.

tl;dr:
I quit Tyrant, because I do not want to support any games with a fraudulent business model like this. I want future games to be made as good games and not as some stuff that you build around a money making scheme. That’s why I will support such games.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [to Devs] Did some EP math and idea

Originally posted by Aenarion:

In every game high level content is locked until you actually are high level

That’s only true for games that use some RPG-like leveling for progress. Tyrant uses it, so that’s what you have to expect.

But every game? Take Star Craft and assume you had to do some grinding before you could use Carriers in live PvP. That’s stupid. There, all players have access to every unit of their race from the beginning. But
you still have a huge difference between high level play and newbies: It’s entirely in the players skill. That allows new players to get into the game faster; They just have to learn/train. If they are talented, they can reach high level fast, if the are not, the will never reach it.

For that reason, I would never want to play Tyrant competetively. For me it’s mostly about collecting cards at my own pace.

Hm, sorry for going of-topic, but that mentality bothers me.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / The Truth about Evade, Regenerate, and all other Chance related stuff...

Years ago (before refresh, where everyone was running quickstrike decks with 3-5HP units), the worst offender was Dozer Tank. When this guy sitting in a defense deck decided to go on a regeneration chain, he could
destroy the entire deck alone (or at lest with help from Atlas). The topic came up often enough that someone decided to actually do the test. You can find the results here .

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Tyrant Errors

I found a little Bug with the new Deck-Hash:
I have two Ateliers, a normal one and a foil one. Those provide different hash codes, when I put them in a deck and click the Hash, button: “Lw” and “-Bpg”, respectively. But when I try to load a deck via the Hash, I get the message: “No valid Nanites”. This is caused by the foil version, if I remove “-Bpg”, the Deck loads succesfully, but without my second Atelier.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Getting off fansite

Originally posted by sss1:

i’ve written my reasons on forums several times. i like to think i’m principled, not stubborn, but in this case it doesn’t matter that much. the main reason is deleting profile is quite heavy, and allowing people to add/delete profile several times per day just to hide “important info” would simply kill the server.

as it ‘ve been said many times already – don’t like fansite – don’t use it. unlike me – you have that choise :D

That’s a good reason not to allow poeple to delete their account without much thinking and creating a new one, when they need it. But I think people, who want to unregister for privacy reasons should be allowed to do so. You see, Novellean doesn’t want to use the site, but he also doesn’t want his info being displayed there, while he still wants to play the game. Unfortunately, he created an account at some time. He should be allowed to leave.

To solve the problem: Add an option to unregister. When used, the fansite deletes all the stuff except the username. That user is not allowed to re-register for some time (2-4 weeks). Problem solved.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [DEV] 9/26/2012 Abandon Tile & Stalling Battles

Originally posted by ohnonooh:
Originally posted by DrFaustus:
Originally posted by ohnonooh:

If stalling cant be solved due to numbers limitation for whatever reason, just make it known to all that stalling isn’t allowed and will result in ban because that is an abuse of game mechanism.

[…]

IF there is no way to do it, I agree. But there are plenty of ways to solve the problem via implementing smart rules (for example, see my post above).

But keeping loopholes open, announcing certain tactics to be an exploit and then calling for bans is a much inferior solution. That’s because a) there might be a gray area, what is an exploit and what isn’t, which causes players to push playing as close as possible to the exploit, b) detection might require additional coding, and c) it requires regular manual work to detect someone using a known exploit and banning them.

Attempting something like that will never completely solve the problem and generates a big amount of permanent work (see botting).

I am saying IF. Yes there are ways to solve it, but I am making the post as per the OP of Dev. Notice their “solution” is to limit players rather then to solve the issue itself by changing the code that deals with the healing upon lost. I really have no idea why Dev refuse to choose some of the suggested solution over setting the limitation of single attempt at any given time. That is really……

Honestly would you prefer the “one player attack at any one time” solution Dev propose? Imo that is even worse then having Dev just announce stalling as exploit directly.

Botting is more difficult to tackle with simple banning because those are alts after all. If Dev announce from 29/09/12 onwards stalling is deem as exploit and players found abusing it will be ban, will you abuse it on your main?

I see your points. Yes, this could be easier to tackle with bans than the botting problem. And yes, I would not like to go back to single player attacks.

But the devs opened this thread asking for suggestions, which means they might choose a different solution. And I am pretty sure that they will choose one, where they change the code. Since they don’t want to get spammed with E-Mails from people who think someone cheated.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Dev] D:

Originally posted by armagheddonman:

In addition to buffing old cards, can you make unique reward cards purchasable with gold/components? It would be a lot easier for making decks, and it won’t disrupt anything since uniques are limited to 1 per deck anyway.

I guess especially with conquest there is good reason to prevent having multiples of eg. Iron Maiden: Otherwise people would put duplicates of the single best deck they have everywhere, which is plain boring.

But there is a simple solution to the actual problem that you don’t want to rip apart 3 different def.-decks to build a single deck for a quest/mission: Add one deck-slot, which is for missions/quests/maybe tournaments, but cannot be used for defense or faction battles. On this deck-slot you can use all your cards, even if they are already in a different def.-deck.

And on topic:
I think regular map resets are a good if not even necessary thing for conquest to be/stay interesting.

And on buffing old cards: Yaaayyy! I always wanted this but didn’t even care to hope. Still I have to agree that Tiamat is not the card that needs a buff. Look at gold sealed tournaments: if a rare card regularily isn’t put into the decks (eg. Stormrunner, Plague Duster or Contaminant Scour), then that’s a candidate for a buff. Tiamat still appears in many top decks for quests. The enclave pack has several candidates for buffs and there are many 1000honor raid rewards that could be pimped a bit.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [DEV] 9/26/2012 Abandon Tile & Stalling Battles

Originally posted by ohnonooh:

If stalling cant be solved due to numbers limitation for whatever reason, just make it known to all that stalling isn’t allowed and will result in ban because that is an abuse of game mechanism.

[…]

IF there is no way to do it, I agree. But there are plenty of ways to solve the problem via implementing smart rules (for example, see my post above).

But keeping loopholes open, announcing certain tactics to be an exploit and then calling for bans is a much inferior solution. That’s because a) there might be a gray area, what is an exploit and what isn’t, which causes players to push playing as close as possible to the exploit, b) detection might require additional coding, and c) it requires regular manual work to detect someone using a known exploit and banning them.

Attempting something like that will never completely solve the problem and generates a big amount of permanent work (see botting).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [DEV] 9/26/2012 Abandon Tile & Stalling Battles

Originally posted by Bascule2000:
Originally posted by guinessguy:

On the issue of stalling on a tile:

I agree that the proposed “one attack at a time” solution takes a lot of strategy out of Conquest attacking. A lot of the alternate solutions proposed in this thread seem rather cumbersome to me. Someone floated a fairly simple idea a few days ago that I’d much rather see implemented. As soon as you begin an attack, the opposing commander gets 10 health (although not exceeding the nominal limit of the commander, 100, 120 or whatever). Should you win, at the moment of victory you do that 10 damage back to the opposing commander PLUS whatever damage you normally do, based on attack upgrades. This lets any number of people attack at once if they are so inclined, but doesn’t reward anyone from staying in battles that they have lost.

There may be an exploit here as well – there’s a lot of clever people on the boards, and I’m sure they’ll point it out if there is. But this seems to me a very straightforward fix. Thoughts?

It’s easy to exploit. Attack with 10 people simultaneously, the initial heal is wasted because the deck starts on max health, then only 5 have to win to defeat the deck.

And this again has an easy solution: On starting an attack, try to heal the slot for 10 damage. If the healing happened: do nothing on loosing, do 20 damage on win. If no healing happened at the beginning: heal 10 on losing, deal 10 on winning. This way multiple guys can attack simultaneously while no potential heal from losses is wasted.

Of course, these battles should still have the 5 minute cap until auto-surrender.

Alternative method: damage and healing are dealt at the end of the battles as it is now, but the tile cannot die until all battles have finished. So it can temporarily go to negative health and be healed back to life.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Easy Conquest Decks

Originally posted by Loop_Stratos:
Originally posted by ManuelDevil:
Originally posted by Loop_Stratos:

Emanuel+10 Sustained Wall:Eazy Trololol Wallstall

blight golem Trololol noob .-.

Hey!It Buys Some Time!

That’s what the skip button is for.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Very choppy/laggy since recent update?

I have the same problem. Waiting 30sec for a card to apear in a deck, when switching around cards for quests is really annoying.

So I refresh → loading stops while “Waiting for CardModule”!!! ARRRGGHH!

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Easy Conquest Decks

Those decks are too spammy for good conquest defense: Once scouted, a single card deck (eg. Empress with Thundercrag, maybe + Adytum) is a 100% win against those. You definitely need more variety in conquest defense!

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / List of Suggestions for Conquest

Great suggestions, Shadowhopeful.

Originally posted by Shadowhopeful:
[…]

Give Officers/Leaders the ability to test/remove def decks
Because some people can’t tell if a deck is good or not

[…]

I’d prefer, if everyone could play test-matches against the own defense-decks. Just like you can fight against the war-defense-deck of any other faction member. This would also help creating those decks in the first place, especially on tiles with special effects.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Dev] Conquest Beta upcoming changes

Originally posted by Sakubo:

i’m sure it’s been mentioned but.. why exactly are quests (and now conquest rewards) not just on a fixed timer like daily chance exactly? that is obviously the best way to do it, so there has to be a reason why it isn’t

I don’t know the official answer, but I guess it is for fairness. The current setup makes sure that you always have 24h to do the 5 steps. Without energy-updates, it takes more than one bar of energy, and if you don’t have the perfect decks, you could be in trouble.

Example: Assume, you have no energy udgrades and your living in a “late” timezone; that is, when you log in, it’s only a one or two hours until the server resets the daily chance. If you run into a difficult step and loose 3 or 4 battles, you are screwed. On the other hand, with the current setup, you have the chance to log in at a later time within 24h and complete the quest.

With this argument in mind, I’d say the 23h timer for quests would be ideal.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [DEV] 9/11/2012 Announcement about Conquest

Since when has tyrant even tried to be a fair game?

You’ve been playing for longer → more and better cards → unfair.
You spend money for WBs → more and better cards → unfair.
You are willing to pay for stamina refills → more attacks → unfair.
You are lucky with your tournament draw → better cards during tournament → unfair.

Tyrant isn’t about being fair. It’s about creating the urge to grind or pay, because you need more and better cards. This is known as addiction.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [GAME] What's that card?

Originally posted by Loop_Stratos:

Damage me,and you will hurt much(Unless striked),my stats is same with many,many cards,Who am i???


(there are 11 cards with 3/1 (1) , but 15 with 2/3 (1) )

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / 8 minutes of pain

Originally posted by lolizard:

First turn Elemental.

That only runs into a Mark of Hope each turn, which keep on being summoned…

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Imperial should have a rare level constant summon card

Hm, why not make a real feedback loop? Something like
Pest
1/4/1 Bloodthirsty
Poison 2
Disease
Summon Pest

Or in form of a pair:
Constructor
2/8/3 Xeno
Evade
Pierce
Summon Factory

Factory
-/5/2 Xeno Structure
Rally all Xeno 1
Heal all Xeno 1
Summon Constructor

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Suggestion] Deck Import Codes

I agree that this is a great idea. However, I doubt that the devs will implement it. Reason: You wouldn’t need to buy additional deck spots anymore (they are a waste of gold/WBs IMO already now, but some people buy them).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / I need new cards, how about 300k per pack for Awakening?

Originally posted by Viiew:
[…]

Why am I complaining? Because there’s no reason to be more active in this game anymore. Sure, I get more gold, but then where am I going to spend my gold for good use?

In other words: you’re not playing the game, because it’s fun, but merely to collect more stuff. If a game is not fun to you on it’s own, then stopp playing the game. If you want to collect stuff, there are always stamps etc..

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Post Active Raid Links Here

Enough time to do the raid easily, get max honour and maximum nexus beacons!

Tartarus Swarm #12236
Join | Status | Suggested decks

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / [Dev] Tyrant Announcement

Originally posted by synapticon:

Yes, we’re trying to make it less important to be on “all the time” as opposed to slightly more passive-friendly gameplay.

Originally posted by synapticon:

We do not intend for the in-game packs to require grinding.

This sounds like it’s going to go in a completely new direction than anything else that has come before. I’m exited about it, though it sounds pretty mysterious, how it should/could be done.

On another point: 90 cards in a set (where you draw random packs) is huge and makes it very difficult to complete (see Gold packs after the addition of righteous stuff). I really do hope that the devs spend enough time on ballancing the cards in this set. Such a huge set would be extremely frustrating, when the balance is as screwed as in HW (a few cards so good that they are must haves, while most rare cards have no significance; Egor having the same rarity as UBs, Taloc the same as Necrogedon).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Tyrant / Good decks to fight against quests

Originally posted by protoflare:

I’ve noticed that once the card pool has been determined when the quest starts, it will always be the same so you can build an effective counter for it.

That’s nice to know. Is there more information, how the opposing deck is generated? I guess, the quest commanders have their skills fixed, some core cards that they always have, and some card pools for variations of that. So basically like raids. Is this correct?