What do YOU want the game to look like?


#1

We often see a post that is about changing a certain card . Sometimes we see a suggestion about the card change itself. But its hard to make evryone happy. So i wanted to aask all of you out there what you want this game to look like, what styles of decks are your favourite, do you prefer a fast meta it is rght now, or maybe control meta, or you are dreaming about combo decks being most popular? Please, write down arguments to make it easier to understand your point of view.

As for me i would like this game to have some room for 7+ mana minions outside the abbysian decks. And the way to achive this would be to change some spot removal to be more efficient against low mana minions and make control support minions in mid game. Something like
"3 mana spell: Destroy a minion. Your general takes damage equal to the health of removed minion "
“4 mana 3/5 minion: While your opponet has more minions, this minion deals 2 damage to nearby enemy minions at the end of the turn.”
“5 mana 4/6 minion: Oppening gambit: restore health equal to the summ of all enemies’ attack”

I hope that this post will help CPG to better understand the community, and help us to understad all the aspects of the game that are valuable to different players.


#2

Well it looks fine to me, but I wouldn’t mind control meta to happen.


#3

Honestly in my experience, other than certain magmar decks and to a lesser extent argeon, the game isn’t all that fast right now, there are some very good control decks in Vanar and abyssian right now.

Also in respect to the thread, I want the game to keep changing and evolving. I don’t think it’s reasonable to want the meta to be control or aggro at any one time. I actually really like the meta the way it is now, some control is good, some aggro is good. It adds another layer to decisions when you’re playing against them, makes it more interesting to try and figure out what kind of deck they’re running


#4

Sabotage decks in-bound?

maybe mind steal will be viable then


#5

Can we consider rush decks to be an archetype of is it just a useful keyword?


#6

I guess you can consider anything that gives a reasonable understanding of the deck as an archetype.


#7

I totally get the selling point of lightning fast games, and I definitely don’t ever want this to turn into slow, grindy, ends via decking Hearthstone Warrior Control mirror match. That said, I fear the game might become TOO fast. With gradual power creep and better threats the game inevitably speeds up and aggro decks get better and better and it becomes that much harder to play a dedicated control deck.

One issue that ALL card games eventually face, especially as more and more cards come out, is power creep and the fact that powerful new cards eventually make old cards competitively obsolete. Eventually, Duelyst will have to split the game into more than one constructed format and have a format in which not every single card is legal.


#8

I’d like to see Vetruvian have the capability to deal with ranged or corner-stuck minions without having to walk on top of them.

Blast is a pale shadow(if that) of out-of-hand removal or damage.


#9

I would really like to see emergance of diverse archetypes in the meta. Right now we have insane options however some ‘meme’ decks feel just 1 support card away from finding their place in meta. I would also like to see more artifacts, generals being active part of the game (movable and able to attack) is one of the many unique mechanics Duelyst has, and artifacts help highlight that, thats why I would like to see more artifact synergy. Perhaps a minion which loses hp instead of artifacts loosing durability would be a good start.


#10

A very nice fair question, and I like your goal as well.

I’d like the game to have the following properties:

  • Relatively fast matches (around 10 turns max)
  • Matches mostly end because one of the players is able to make use of a strategy that required at least some setup beforehand, rather than due to being able to frustrate everything the other player does so the game ends through simple attrition and a final-turn burst
  • A diverse meta with a mix of aggro, mid range and control decks
  • Conditional removal & dispel (range limits, scaling, drawbacks etc)
  • The Ranged keyword gets a numerical qualifier that indicates difference in range (i.e. Range 3 allows a minion to attack things up to three tiles away from it)
  • Control decks that rely on big ‘late’ game cards that provide a reasonably inevitable win condition
  • Rush gets its movement and attack component split so you get two variants: ‘Attack OR move’ and ‘attack AND move.’ Most things should get the former rather than the latter.
  • An emphasis on cards and interactions that allow the other play to effectively play around their opponent (either proactively or reactively) in ways other than healing themselves, and preferably by involving the battlefield
  • A policy that lets CPG buff unused cards

There may be other things but these are the ones that came to mind!


#12

Something like this. More depth, more room for design space, tone down the ridiculous power baseline a little, and we’re good to go.


#19

I want the game to look like its filled with players praying for the nerf hammer to smash Magmar and Abyssian to tiny little pieces… oh wait.


#20

I’d like it to have more disclosed lore ¯\__(ツ )_ _/¯


#21

Yes please, serpenti lore :weary::weary::weary:

They did actually tease serpenti lord in the most recent patch updates tho :wink:


#22

Wasn’t really a teaser, more like a teasing :>


#23

Let me dream :weary:
15 char


#24

Honestly, I don’t see the value in trying to make Duelyst different beyond tweaks and small changes. Metagames are emergent- and the game simply has too many moving pieces to really have fine control over the player experience. So, I’d rather have a clearer picture about what the game actually is (community oriented playtesting, larger groups of more dedicated players etc-) than do anything more drastic to the design than errata for dysfunctional cards, or suggest that Rush becomes 3 or more distinct keywords, with Rush as is being left to Tusk Boar and Makantor Warbeast only.

Even if say, my suggestions happened, the game wouldn’t change all that much, and a large part of that is because the community is small and insular- and the tourney scene is smaller still. The community likely has very little idea about where things stand empirically


#25

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.