Duelyst Forums

The Creep Paradox: Why rotation will set balance on its side forever


#1

So I’ve been thinking recently about creep and how almost all of it is rotating. People have been saying that CPG will print new Creep support, maybe make creep easier to make now that there’s no obliterate or azalea. This is a problem. If creep is extremely easy to make, then the players in wild will have a field day and the meta there would be all Creep, and it would get very stale. Just a reminder that but most of the players say they’d play un-rotated more than standard. If Creep doesn’t get real support this expansion, the archetype will suffer and lots of people will be upset.

This is going to happen with a lot of things over time, and I’m sure it’s going to cause people to quit if either scenario happens.

Not saying rotation should be cancelled because evidently devs want it, just putting my thoughts out there.

I also am a believer that un-rotated should be the primary mode or at least have the same rewards as standard.

What’s your take on this, guys?


#2

ban limited list much better than rotation for longevity of the game. perfect example yugioh dark magician blue eyes deck once meme now still playable somewhat (ignoring link summon) just giving an example i hope others dont create an entire discussion about yugioh again lol…edited so for example overused cards like thunderhorn n somewhat emp would be limited to one(even tho one may say just need one emp anyways but at least it affects how ppl play. hitting in faction cards would be limiting them to two it all depends…i know i know yugioh is a completely different game because this deals with mana slots so best mana cards would always take priority idk maybe i think its just too soon to have rotation because we are at a time where factions have an identity now i would hold off the whole rotation for a couple more expansions


#3

My words exactly


#4

I vote against rotation the reason being - factions are getting nailed on diffrent levels.
For example - vanar is losing their vespyr utility, infiltrate win con, and walls wincon.
But lyonar losing some niche cards nobody is using.
On the unrotated expansion is an expansion and adds to your card pull for new viable decks.
In rotated you basically got some untouched lyonar and a broken vanar to fix from the start.


#5

There’s already Kaboom-Ka and certain rotating cards, so my hopes for a balanced unranked mode are not so high (really hard to tell whether those combos will be op or just good, but I’m sure some new cards will will enable things which will be way over the top)


#6

Both of these decks don’t care about mr4! (Blue-eyes can’t run brilliant fusion anymore, but that is the only real casualty.) and Dark Magician topped YCS London iirc.


#7

but at least we all get my point tho dead cards in the past can become good with new cards. rotation just kills off that nostalgic feel for old players… hell maybe one day in the future yugioh god cards might actually be meta


#8

Obelisk was actually quite good in the past.

An Irish player even topped worlds with it.


#9

I’m gonna throw in my two cents here. I’ve been resisting the urge to post something like this for a while, those familiar with the way I think probably have an idea of what’s coming.

Rotation is a flat-out bad idea. Banlists are a flat-out bad idea. This isn’t a physical card game. It’s digital. All balance issues can be fixed by buffing and nerfing. And that’s how they should be fixed. There’s no reason not to balance existing cards. Bring the most powerful down some, bring the weakest up, and start pushing toward a middle point bit by bit, until a much larger number of cards, ideally all of them though that’s probably impossible, are competitive options. If you make a balancing mistake, you can revert the bad change, and try balancing it again.

Example, if you feel like falcius is too good, don’t rotate it out, nerf it a little. If it’s still auto-include after a couple weeks or a month, nerf it a little more. If you go too far and kill it, buff it a little. Find the middle ground.

I might understand rotation with a bigger card pool, but relatively speaking there aren’t even that many cards in the pool, and this is much much moreso once you factor out all the non-viable cards. Don’t tell me that ghost lynx even counts as existing at all for the purposes of competitive play, that thing probably barely even sees Bronze.

Counterplay, please tell us your philosophy. Why so few nerfs? Why nearly no buffs ever? Why rotation now? Why release cards that are flat-out bad from birth, like indominus and other big powerful things that have no same-turn impact and fall to unconditional answer cards? Even if I, or we collectively, don’t agree with your reasoning, I feel safe assuming most of us would like to hear why. I personally would be immensely grateful for an explanation.


#10

To make the process of collecting Legendaries through Orbs more arduous by diluting the pool with trash. I’m betting it’s a conscious business decision (that most f2p games make btw) at the expense of the game.


#11

Yeah, it is this way more often than not. Until there is a truly better model to follow (and embraced by major players in the industry), we will see this game design philosophy continue. I don’t have any solutions, because it’s not really my forte.


#12

you’re still much better off having bad legendaries to disenchant than having rarity accurately assigned based on power level and have way more autoincludes be legendary.


#13

There is a fine line between cool memes and boring weak cards. I think Scarzig is the former, while Indominus is the latter, for instance.


#14

*Cough *Cough EMP *Cough (As well as anyother dispel) *Cough


#15

You may want to get that cough looked at…
…it seems to be disrupting my electronics.


#16

is there a poll on this somewhere?


#17

I’m actually *Cough sick IRL and for some reason I uninte_ Cough_ntionally Cough whenever I try to *Cough type something…


#18

There was a while back…

We can do another though

  • I would play only rotation mode
  • I would only play wild mode
  • I would play both
  • I would play both but prefer rotation
  • I would play both but prefer wild

0 voters


#19

Are you making an argument or just an observation? In the case of the latter: I agree, but there are more than those two options.


#20

This doesn’t have a big enough sample size, and it’s skewed to begin with (I doubt most players use the forums much). We really won’t know unless cpg releases data after rotation. And even then the balance could change every expansion.