Duelyst Forums

The future of Duelyst: about card choices, deck variety and rotation

#1

Before delving into the topic, a little background about me. I started playing Duelyst in February 2015, which means I experienced almost all of its iterations. I’ve been playing card games, both physical and digital, for almost 20 years now.

There is a problem that I see surfacing in many different threads in various forms: a lot of people tend to ask for nerfs to cards which are, in their opinion, overpowered. There are others who approach the same problem with a different mentality, stating that cards which are over the curve will always limit card choices, because when a card is so good it will automatically fit into any deck. Just recently, there was a thread which, as an example, said that “Lantern Fox is so good that no matter what version of Songhai you are playing, you are basically forced to use it”.

My point of view on the matter is twofold: on one side, I agree that having Lantern Fox in every deck is gonna get boring, sooner or later, because it will take away the chance for other cards to be played; on the other side, I can’t wait for other powerful cards to show up and to use them alongside Lantern Fox.

Card games always have to face the problem of keeping their cards relevant, while making new cards that are considered by players. Usually this is solved with rotation, something that Hearthstone recently started doing to solve the ubiquitousness of certain cards (mainly Dr. Boom and Piloted Shredder). Now, I know it is far too early for Duelyst to think about rotation, but I’d like to spark some discussion among players, and maybe get the devs to read this.

I’d like to see something like this in the future:
Each season, only the most recent set and two sets chosen at random are legal for ranked. (basic cards are always legal)

This would mean that each season the meta is shaken up and constantly changes, allowing more cards to have their chance to shine, without having to resort to nerfs. At the same time, since the most recent expansion will be always ranked legal, it still allows Counterplay to get revenue for their latest products.

However, to make this possible, Counterplay would need to:

  • Introduce a game mode where all cards are usable (unranked?);
  • Make it so that monthly cards get added to the most recent set, to keep them numerically balanced;
  • Include core in the rotation system, meaning that in some seasons core won’t be legal.

What do you guys think? Once again, I know it’s too early to talk about this, but I want to hear other opinions and hopefully get the devs (who probably already have a plan) to at least consider this idea.

Thanks for reading! Apologies for the huge wall of text and my english syntaxis that sometimes kinda sucks.

1 Like
#2

I despise the idea of set rotations. HS was forced into in because of powercreep and if CPG is smart, they can avoid that trap. Sure, the game has some really strong faction defining cards but that doesn’t apply to the neutral cards and it isn’t really a problem with the current amount of cards.

2 Likes
#3

Current amount of cards that’s the key point there; I’m talking three-four sets from now.

Also, the rotation concept I’m advocating for is very different from Hearthstone since it is not chronological (except for the last set) and by changing every month it means that most sets will have multiple chances to be ranked legal. By its nature, this suggestion means that any set runs the risk of being left out of ranked for a long time only when the game is 2-3 years old or more.

#4

I do realize that and I’m saying how they can avoid it if they’re smart with the way they balance and create cards. They did recognize old vindi’s potential to be a problem so they changed it and I hope they can keep it up.[quote=“githian, post:3, topic:1323”]
Also, the rotation concept I’m advocating for is very different from Hearthstone since it is not chronological
[/quote]

That just makes it even more difficult for people who are trying to build the collection because they can’t DE the cards from rotated sets. It’s even worse than the HS system. Sure it adds variety but it just shits on people who are just trying to keep up with getting the needed cards.

2 Likes
#5

I understand your point of view, but at the same time you are dismissing something huge. In Hearthstone, you are constantly forced to disenchant old cards to try and build up a ranked legal collection. With my suggestion, you’ll know that once you completed a set, that set always has a chance to be ranked legal; you won’t have to disenchant everything and rack up spirit/dust until you once again have a complete set, then rinse and repeat next rotation.

In any case, thanks for giving me your opinion, I don’t want to sound like I disagree with everything other than my thought, just trying to explain my reasoning.

#6

And for the second time I’m saying that’s not good. It makes it impossible for people to keep up with cards and rotations unless they started playing the game from the very start. You’re basically forced to collect every card in the game and even then you can’t use them all the time. And about the part about DE-ing cards from the old sets… It’s not a flaw, it’s a good thing because it’s easier to keep up as you play the game.

What you’re saying is definitely very good from balance and variety perspective (implying CPG fucks and sets are needed in the first place) but by doing it you’re basically telling all the new players or players who don’t spend lots of money of piss off.

2 Likes
#7

Point taken, guess we’ll have to wait and see. As you said, Duelyst might not even need a rotation system. All in all, the original idea came up in my mind because I wanted something different from the usual “all old sets get thrown away and only the new ones are relevant”.

1 Like
#8

It is WAY too early too ask for rotation format in duelyst , we need at least 3 or 4 sets to start doing this.( we currently have one soon a second one)

#9

Just my opinion but I’m against rotation because of this. Temporary or not.
Having a big collection of A which suddenly become redundant. No longer able to play your favourite cards. Imagine the horrors of no longer being able to play Paddo :anguished:
Then you start from square one having to grind/pay for B because you have not enough cards to build a good deck. Playing with B will feel like playing a different game from when playing A.

Balance wise I believe a card that needs to be balanced is a card that needs to be balanced. Rotations only hide the problem. Rotations will also mean sets need to be designed to work independently. You would avoid things like a card from B depending on a card from A.
Balancing might be a mess depending how the rotation works. You might get A balanced with B and B with C but not A with C.

#10

I too hate rotation formats, it is the single reason I quit Hearthstone.
I hope they don’t.

#11

It is a digital game ,It is already messed up if counterplay closes tomorrow that’s it all your money spent is fine and left with nothing.You are telling me they are taking away cards because they can’t balance cards that they can instantly change.

The only way I would be cool with a “rotation” is that mode with all the Cards is the main focus and rotation is secondary to that.

#12

In my opinion, rotations exist in card games because: a) to organize design: so you can prevent weird combos from popping out and dominating the game and b) to force everyone to just buy a new collection while maintaining the power level. This is because you can’t really change cards after you release them physically (not without confusing everyone at least).

Digital games have the benefit you can always patch things post-release. This way, CPG could fix whatever combo gets out of hand and keep the power level as they please.

However, there is also de business aspect of it. Imagine we have our meta mostly set, CPG announces a new collection and people spot 2-3 cards deemed ‘worthy’. As soon as the new collection lands, people craft those cards and things settle just so.

Sure, some inclusions could change de meta drastically, some hidden combo or some specific card against specific matchups. But I find it unlikely that a whole new collection replaces the old one, unless the power level increases.

In this case, CPG has to raise the power level of the whole new collection to get people interested in getting more cards and thus buying spirit orbs. This leads to powercreep.

This said, as a more casual player I’m not fond of the idea of sets becoming ‘obsolete’ but I’m not sure what the answer is. Maybe some compromise as proposed by the OP would be sound.

#13

I’ll say this much: A game design studio which resorts to set rotation in a digital CCG is a game design studio that is no longer creative enough to deserves my money.

I had full sets of Hearthstone cards on all three servers. The day Blizzard announced set rotation was the day I stopped logging in altogether. I paid fair money for my fair amount of fun. No hard feeling there. It wasn’t like dude you are taking away what I paid for. A lot of the fun in CCG is simply the ever-expanding set of options, of choosing between Azure Drake and Ethereal Conjurer. When a game design studio admits that they have to resort to set rotation to “keep things fresh,” whether it’s hard set rotation (actually rotating out cards) or soft set rotation (power creep, etc.), their game design ability has reach the limit for which I will pay money.

The day Counterplay tells me that they can come up with no more interesting choices between The Scientist and Ruby Rifter or Healing Mystic and Shiro Puppydragon is the day I tell them thanks for all the good time, goodbye.

3 Likes
#14

The change from 2draw to 1draw was the developer’s way of nipping powercreep in the bud. Decks had gotten to a certain point where new cards couldn’t be included without being strictly better.

The key to diversity is to give players choices. So as long as the players can make meaningful choices for what their deck needs, there won’t be a need for rotation. In my experience, card rotations become necessary when certain cards have just been around forever, define the way the game is played, and are in every deck and can’t be ousted because they are so useful.

In addition to these traits (which we see in Duelyst somewhat, but that is due to the small card pool) they often are very boring and straightforward effects, so it limits design space.

I would like to see how Shim’Zar shakes up build diversity before I make a concrete call on the direction the game is heading, but I do agree that set rotation is something that should be discussed at the very least, while it is still a very very distant possibility, and not an iminent one.

2 Likes
#15