Under rating threshold (hideshow)
What about increasing the chance for getting a new card for a win with the players level?
Or maybe even better by the level difference between the winning player to the losing player?
chance = 2% base + 0,5% * (WinPlayerLevel - LosePlayerLevel) if WinPlayerLevel>LosePlayerLevel
or just
chance = 2% base + 0,2% * WinPlayerLevel
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I don't think the doomed spell is too overpowered, it isn't that easy to use (at least not when the opponent is smart enough to look at your attacks)
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
"why can’t you leave a pairing in ranked match, but you can in quickmatch??"
BECAUSE THAT SUBVERTS THE ENTIRE POINT OF HAVING RANKED MATCHES
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
This is an excellent game, the only thing I would change is make it a bit faster, it seems to take forever.
Oh, and there should be like 1,000 cards, so that you don't see the same cards over and over and over...
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Repth, did you ever think of using an attack that hits all opponents? If you do, their character out of the battle with 2 HP left in your little scenario would be history.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Do you really think that's a good advantage? With that kind of "advantage" said skill is basically useless early on in the match unless its a final blow. Otherwise you get someone with about 60 hp left, use power toss, and have them leave battle with only 2 hp left and the rest of the match to heal it up. It just seems pointless to me.
Fail sauce.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
why can't you leave a pairing in ranked match, but you can in quickmatch?? because i was paired with the same guy three times in a row. :(
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Short time playing:
Honestly, a good game, but I can already tell that it's going to get monotonous pretty quickly - I'd say as much even if I had an "ultimate combo" and I were winning constantly.
Gameplay is a bit slow for what it is. At least, it seems slow, because you keep constantly doing the same thing over and over - it feels like a really long, single battle.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
To me, throwing an opponnent out of battle being an effect on some attacks is just plain stupid. I weaken them with it and they get "Thrown out" (Which to them is an obvious advtantage. LIke switching without me even having a chance to intercept.) It's just pointless. At least give them some kind of penalty if that happens. Like maybe stunned for one turn when brought back into play, or can't heal while out of play or just ANYTHING.
It's absolutely POINTLESS.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
So far, it's fun, pretty straightforward, and I feel like I could be playing this for a while instead of getting the badges and leaving the game alone forever. Nice work.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
bane2000 Jun. 17, 2008
ever think of a setting where both players HAVE to do random?
+1000 Hopefully someone will get the message.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
it'd be nice if every time you won, the % of getting a card increases 2 more %, therefore you get a card 100% at 100 wins.... that'd be fairer :P
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
to filbert: if i am not wrong it is under a compound system and if you have won 100 times after the patch happened u should get a card
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Instead of a 2% chance to win a card, it should be a solid 1 card every 50 wins. I have 66 wins and already have won 2 cards, and earlier I heard someone saying that he had over 130 wins and still had won nothing.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
scionoflight there's already another set under development, they want to finish balancing and fixing bugs on this one before they start testing those though.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
So, let me get this straight, rare card supporters. You want the already only 46 cards to be split up into different rarities, meaning there'd be an even more limited number of rares. Plus, you think they should be stronger than other cards. The problem with this is that this very limited selection of these stronger cards would end up meaning that nearly all the best players would end up with nearly identical decks. This would be LAME. It's much better if they just keep doing balance changes to keep all the cards equal, so that any card can potentially be part of a great deck, so there'd be that much more strategy involved in picking a deck and that much more variety in the gameplay. And since Helene's damage increases from Enchant Blade don't stack, the game shouldn't show them stacking, so it is a bug. But it is a feature that they don't stack, since that'd make her too good unless they did something else to weaker her.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Tiger Frenzy Attack + Deadly Poison card give a horribly overpowered combo.
Basically all your deck gets poisoned for 2 damage per turn, which wouldn't be a problem except that it STACKS. So if a person uses it 4 times on either of your cards, you'll have all cards losing 8 health per turn (in addition to the normal damage itself).
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Many things don't stack that should, and do stack that shouldn't. Corny's bloodburn would be good if it worked on corny and stacked.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I'm sure someone brought this up before, but helene's light magic doesn't stack. it shows that it stacks, but the damage doesn't increase. bug or feature?
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
it's still a bug because beast feast should only increase damage of tiger attacks... and I don't think ambrosia has any of those
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
@wormeh
That is not a bug. Ambrosia was using the gem of souls which steals the innate ability of whoever she kills. She killed Zina and gained the Beast Feast ability which activated immediately because she just killed Zina.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
First major thing to do: increase de inteligency at practice games... they really don´t have any value besides be some kind of tutorial.
and i´m thinking that the game is actually kind of boring...
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
Zina just got killed by spectral choke (while switching out) and the enemy (ambrosia ofcourse) got BEAST FEAST, nice bug
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
I agree, this is my first day playing and I've already encountered sore losers who AFK when losing. Please set a limit to the timeouts per game.
Under rating threshold (hideshow)
graphics:0/1 i will accept stunning graphics if they move marginally. shifting a immobile icon left and right is not good enough. sound: 1/1 good enough. at least they can get some that dont hurt. gameplay: 0/1 buggy, glitchy, characters sometimes star t partially off screen, but its a good game. another angle: get away from pokemone and ill award this point.