You make it sound as if you are competent in the amount of effort that goes into editing a single card, let alone how that single card will affect all other cards.
You also state several changes for a single card and if the change is still not widely accepted it would be changed again. In a perfect world with infinite time and where it was possible to please everyone this would be amazing but we don’t live there yet.
All i am saying is stop simplifying things you do not understand.
It also wouldn’t look that good for the devs if they changed cards all the time.
What other company does it? I want recent examples of this occurring as well since we are speaking of recent CPG.
What cards did CPG constantly tweak in the past until it was widely accepted as perfect?
Oh and by the way this was also when CPG had less on their plate.
But i am humbly awaiting your examples.
You seem to be implying that the balance team is being overworked with designing the new cards, making art for the new cards, setting up in-game systems for the new cards, communicating with the community about new cards, setting up tournaments and doing the laundry while they’re at it.
The balance team afaik consists of 3 members and a lead, of which only the lead actually has any non-balance designation. So play-testing and balance improvement is pretty much the entire workload of those people. You’re calling the other guy out on his inability to understand things, yet your own knowledge of this particular situation is hazy at best.
Then we move on to the situation of if whether or not they have already decided if our current card pool is balanced for the time being. But I guess that is the answer you would all hate isn’t it.
Clearly the balance team are happy without making changes, since it means they can sip their drink and spend time doing other more important things -
One of the balance team members is a part-time employee who does research in his main job, so he’s not going to have any problems calling the cards balanced if it allows him more time to do his primary job and earning more.
Another is doing a PhD on how players in a game respond to frustration, so his data is only enhanced by not making necessary balance changes.
The newest member of the team is a 17 year old, who can have great ideas, but is highly unlikely to get his voice heard moving up through the hierarchy.
So, yeah, our current card pool is balanced for the time being. Because it suits my narrative, clearly.
I know exactly what you mean, I’ve not even been playing this season, waiting for the faie nerfs.
@ZyX That’s good to know. I hope things will change sooner rather than later, though.
Lame comparison.
THIS IS NOT A CAR, IT’S A FUCKIN ONLINE CARD GAME.
And you didn’t pay for it, or at least you didn’t have to.
Give us a break or take one.
If you don’t like what i have to say then stop reading my posts. If you expect me to stop posting just because you don’t like what i have to say you are gravely mistaken.
@ZyX Thanks for the insight, didn’t even know this. It all makes a lot more sense now.
Still, the balancing was quite solid before Ancient Bonds. I wonder if anything has changed in the meanwhile…
All this hate… it’s really sad to see the community gnawing each other in two.
As if Duelyst wasn’t a game but the most important thing of mankind.
This is a disingenuous statement, it’s almost like I can’t criticize a game because somewhere in Africa a child is starving.
The way how it’s done is what’s wrong about it.
Please keep personal attacks out of the thread or it will be locked. Thank you.
I totally agree with you. People do not understand that the problem we have does not lie with the fact that they perceive the game as unbalanced. The problem we have is that instead of having mature discussions they jump to assume the balance team is lazy and just sitting down at home scratching.
The problem with this stupid argument is that just because you know someone’s professions does not mean you know their priorities and other events in life.
Everything you are stating zyx are ur assumptions and they are not facts. You do not know for 100% certainty that they are neglecting the game for their own personal gains. Then finally you are assuming that CPG does not take all balance suggestions of the already small balance team equally by stating that the 17 year old basically has no say in the matter. What did they hire him for? To rub their bellies?
CPG is a business at the end of the day and a business has employees. Do you really think that the employees of the other departments would simply allow the balancing team to slack off and be essentially hurting the game? I’m still waiting for you to make a solid argument zyx cause so far all you have done is place stigmas on people who you do not know.
They’re assumptions, not facts. Fair point. But so are your so-called ‘points’.
And I’m the one making ‘stupid arguments’, and ‘placing stigmas on people I do not know’. I simply responded in language you seem to wield, and therefore would understand clearly.
Just as a note - I’m the same person who made posts such as these:
I have no vested interest in speaking against CPG after being really quite strongly involved with the game over 2 years - including times where people actually accused me of being paid by CPG to write and post about things in a very favourable light towards them! I speak simply because I still genuinely believe that Duelyst has the potential to be more, bigger, better - multiple things are stopping this from happening, on the non-balance end we look at how the Rift introduction was managed, how 2-draw went to 1-draw with very little beta-testing, how Shim’zar was introduced and so on. We can’t go back and change what was handled badly, but there is something that can be changed to at least guarantee a better playing environment.
Now it seems to be the case that you say the game is balanced - but really, what you’re saying, is that you don’t care about any changes, and you want others also to not care about any changes. Those are two different things - you are welcome to not post about keeping the status quo, we are obliged to post because a lot of us think there is something to be gained from CPG listening to us.
Now for my vitriol against one member of the current balance team - there’s a decent backstory to this that there is no reason for you to have known about - but simply put, one of the balance team members thought it was fit to say that I should never be employed by CPG after I suggested a change to a card, on a public forum. That exact change was implemented 2 weeks later - now I am completely sure that the change had nothing to do with my suggestion, however the incident showed the first signs of someone who was just there for the ride, and wasn’t critically analysing the card set. Further examples over the months have only served to strengthen the conviction that this member is just 'yesman’ning his way through. (I’m still happy to be proven wrong by that person, and I will submit an apology if that is the case.) I don’t have to reiterate current public opinion on Joseki, again, I’m very happy to rescind my comments given evidence to the contrary.
Unfortunately, my opinions have been formed over a year of observing the fiasco. This is also why I don’t offer actual changes to cards - since that incident, it is presumptuous to offer if at least a quarter of the team thinks that the provider is incompetent. You are giving the team the benefit of the doubt, I’m merely doing the opposite based on my experiences at large.
I honestly agree with everything else you have said.
But yeah I do advocate for people to speak up and host discussions if they are having a problem with something but what I am against is when people dramatize the situation as opposed to stating the problem in detail and suggesting solutions to solve the matter. What I usually see on this forum and this attitude doesn’t just apply to Duelyst. But yeah what I usually see is people just complaining about things but the complaints usually add nothing to the table. I love to see suggestion threads and i am sure we all prefer them to rant threads.
You seem to have some kind of confirmation bias here. This forum as well as the reddit is full with well thought out posts of different people including myself providing analysis and possible solutions to the problems we see and all we get in return is silence.
So please tell me, why should i bother to make the same page long posts about the same old problem again and again when CPG doesn’t bother to show even the slightest response and when i already know from about one year of experience that they won’t be considered anyway in the end? I mean Ryvirath can tell us all day he is reading and passing on everything we write here but what does that do for us if nothing changes? The game doesn’t get better from his promises alone.
At some point the only things left to do are ranting or quitting. Both choices aren’t really productive so it pretty much comes down to “Are you frustrated enough to quit the game for good or do you still have some hope that things might change at some point”? I am kind of in the middle, i don’t really have any hope left that this game will ever become what it could be, but i am also not frustrated enough to just move on entirely.
I thought long and hard about replying to this thread and I think I will. First of all this thread is obviously click bait. This patch is obviously not a balance patch. To call it anything but an “improvement to” or “relaunch of” gauntlet is foolish at best.
Anyway, I do feel that most people are pretty one sided in terms of how CPG engages with the community. I will preface my following statement by saying, I am talking as person who has and does work for software development companies. I have not worked for a game developer but since games are software there is at least some overlap about client engagement and releases that I feel my personal experience speaks to. I will also say that this is not a defense or attack on CPG. I will try to keep my personal opinion on how they have handled things to myself for the most part.
From my experience there are a few things to consider when performing releases in software. Of these things, from a more business standpoint, you have to consider 1) the overall stability of the product and 2) if you are setting a precedent for the future. Now, in the first case the stability of the product not only entails understanding if the product will have bugs (i.e. will it crash or not) but also it how much churn there is in released code on the software. This means that if you’re making constant, frequent, changes to so-called “core functionality” this makes your software or release process look unstable to your clients. So while you may do frequent updates, doing them for the sake of testing new “fixes” is inherently a bad idea from a business point of view. From the point of view of a game this means that doing something like releasing a card to change it two weeks later may actually be harmful in long run. People will see cards as being unstable and will actually lose confidence in your ability to maintain a stable product. This is something to consider when we have discussions about “quick, small, updates”. They sound good from a client perspective but in actual practice they may not work well.
On the second point, we do have to remember that when engaging with a client you need to also set an expectation of how interaction with you will go in the future. One of the worst scenarios is being in a case where you react to a group of clients nearly immediately because they are upset about something. The reason for this is that it sets an expectation for future engagement from clients, where they give threats rather than engaging in dialogue because they now feel they have power to get their way with you. Having been on the receiving end of this type of engagement, this is not a good situation to be in as a company. Generally, this is what all these posts about “I’m leaving” or “If you don’t change this, I won’t play anymore” are attempting to do intrinsically. I say intrinsically here because I do believe that there are people that are honestly disillusioned with the state of the game and are offering solutions because they want to see the game thrive. That being said you do not want to be seen as unresponsive, but rather measured as to how you approach client grievances and concerns. This, however, does not mean you have to instantly (where instantly means something like a month) respond to your clients. However, if you are getting a number of negative, intelligent, responses from your clients I believe you should provide a measure of feedback. This may simply be a statement of acknowledgement that you are looking in to options (which is not actually an admission of guilt).
Anyway TLDR; remember that you are dealing with a company and as far as engagement goes with a company there is a business side to consider as to how they deal with you. No response does not mean inaction (especially in a short period of time), it may only mean there is no good, internally proposed, resolution at this time.