Duelyst Forums

What do you want the most in the future of Duelyst?

#63

I don’t think that data really makes your point particularly well. The first graph on that link has been roughly flat since HS launched, and flat at a very large number. Sure, there are variations related to expansions, but they had something like 10,000,000 players within a month of launch and the player base has only increased in size, overall, since then. I don’t think this is a good basis for comparison at all.

I’m not a doomer about Duelyst, I’ve been quite consistent in saying that I look forward to this game having a bright future. I am simply saying that I believe there is cause for concern seeing top players quit out of boredom, player numbers diminish, and queue times increase. I don’t think anyone should freak out about this, but neither should they dismiss it.

I would like to see CPG ramp up the marketing engine and generate some excitement. Let us in on their plans for the immediate future and into next year. We are the ambassadors for the game, the enthusiasts, the ones who spread word of mouth, positive or negative. I hate seeing Duelyst players talking up (IMO) inferior games just because they are looking for more variety they can’t find here.

And also IMO, it would be better for everyone if the word “discoverable” was round-filed permanently. Obviously they can’t make exact promises before they are ready. But it’s been many weeks now since even a peep was heard from anyone about what is coming up. This is bad for player morale – and bad for business.

There should be a weekly newsletter at the very least discussing upcoming plans and features, what’s being worked on, etc. Players kept in the dark will wander off to somewhere brighter.

8 Likes
#64

I agree that a campaign would be great. Single player campaigns are a nice challenge, and a great excuse to try out new types of decks.

#65

  1. There’s lots of Arcanysts and Golems but there aren’t a lot for Mech. So more subtypes, more cards in some subtypes, and subtypes that play off eachother more or target eachother more. A pet hunter that targets pets, or wrangler that puts them in your action bar?

  2. More game modes. One I’ve been thinking about – gives players a few sets of neutrals to choose from, then they build a deck around it. Another possibility is a tag team mode where you get 2 generals and can switch them out with their respective decks.

  3. What I’d really like to see is more board variety. Perhaps one way to do this is with special structure/wall cards that are only available to be played in the beginning. Attacker cannot place theirs until turn 2. Some could only be played on the first 3 columns of a player’s side. Could be subtypes like fortification or siege engines, or spells that create permanent features that can’t be dispelled. Like a rift that blocks movement and spawns a token battle pet. A living wall that absorbs health from anything adjacent; a creep that spreads more of itself in a random direction and immobilizes things on top of it.

2 Likes
#66

I like your first idea but more cards for mech is just risky since mech is already pretty powerful

1 Like
#67

Well you could have stuff that counters mechazor by throwing out a bunch of defense drones in random spaces with the same ability as wind stopper. Or mech units with anti-mech abilities like ‘if mechazor is in play, transform this unit into mechazilla, with rush and provoke’ … ‘select another mech unit, this unit is jammed (no abilities until your next turn)’ ‘opening gambit: all enemy mechs are stunned’ ‘hack enemy mech: it attacks nearest enemy’ etc.

#68

Thank lord you’re not in the game’s design team :eyes:

1 Like
#69

You should make a Mecha CCG.

1 Like
#70

well if that im fine but still including these cards in your deck is a waste of space i would prefer being able to silence of mech progresion

#71

I think adding more cards wouldn’t make Mechs that much stronger, but just give more versatility. I think like 90% of the Mech decks all run the same Mech cards. 2 or 3x or every mech, and rarely Chasis of Mechazor. If they add in more Mech cards then I think most players would drop some of the older cards and replace them with the newer ones. You would still would need space for non-mech cards(removal,faction 2 drops, etc…) As long as the new mech cards aren’t OP then the Mech Archetype as a whole shouldn’t be either.

#72

[offtopic]

Wrong. You want to have as much mechs as possible in order to get the mechaz0r out as soon as possible. Chassis is a pretty decent 4 drop as well so there’s really no reason not to run it. (it actually used to not be run like half a year ago but that changed). About you saying how adding more mechs will not necessarily make the deck stronger but instead will just give it variety, I also don’t agree with that for the same reason. Mech decks don’t really need lots of non mech cards, they need few removal cards in order to last long enough till they drop the mechaz0r, some draw and that’s about it. Neutral cards are being run because there’s no choice considering the limited numbers of mech, not because they’re necessarily good.

Source: spent way too much time playing mech decks.

[/offtopic]

1 Like
#73

Its fine just good synergies stop complaining. There are ways to deal with it if you know how to play ur faction well. Unless ur vet. Then ur screwed

#74

I’m not defending those suggestions specifically – just saying there could be a counter to the strength of mechazor.

I’ve thought about it before

1 Like
#75

You’re right- when you’re talking about people who are already skilled in card games.

Duelyst as it is now it’s very intimidating to people who aren’t already skilled or are determined to put in the effort to get skilled. The former might be a deliberate design decision and it’s fine if CPG is willing to have a smaller but more dedicated player base by emphasising skill. But the latter are still learning and it’s important for them to feel like they aren’t going to be trapped in a time sink if they’re going to keep playing.

I don’t know enough about game design to say if Duelyst already achieves this or not, but it’s certainly a valid concern.

#76

what i want most is more players… queue times are really long at times…

#77

Oh really ? It usually takes between 1 second to 10 for me, occasionally 40.

#78

oh i should’ve mentioned i was talking about gauntlet queue times. when the americans are sleeping it can take up to 3 mins to queue, especially at high wins /:

#79

Ah, yeah, it takes some time to find opponents in gauntlet

#80

I’m having trouble to agree with those concerns when the most popular direct competitor Hearthstone is so much worse in terms of progression. AND you can’t even get ahead with pure skill unlike in Duelyst. Which was all that I meant to emphasize with my previous post.

Your perspective may differ and that’s ok, but I’ll try to illustrate my perspective better by telling you about my experience with Duelyst.

My first three months I ranked silver, so don’t get me wrong, I was in no way an experienced TCG player when starting out. And to this day I prefer to play a casual couple of games per day, which still gets me an easy diamond. I just don’t have the patience to grind with the same deck more than 10 times in a row for S-rank, but that doesn’t bother me at all. I’m having fun trying out all kinds of strategies.

The thing is, although my card collection stayed pretty slim for a good while, by slowly learning good deckbuilding and proper positioning I was able to have steady progress that I could attribute to nothing other than my own skill. Which is the single most satisfying thing to experience in a game.

Now I’m comparing that to Hearthstone, which I tried multiple times and just couldn’t bring myself to like even though a lot of my friends try to convince me. It’s just hundreds of games where I was just waiting to draw into OP cards to win me the game and so much salt after unsatisfying losses where it didn’t feel like my opponent deserved the win at all.

When I lost in Duelyst, I knew I deserved that loss. Props to my opponent and thanks for the strategies I can pick up from watching the replays. And when I won, I could be truly proud of myself. It was a battle of wits and I came out the victor, hell yeah!

Point is, Duelyst is hard but fair. It’s what made me fall in love with this game and I wouldn’t want that to ever change.

2 Likes
#81

I love competition. I’ll always be competitive. However…

Some days, I just want to play cards. I don’t want to be competitive. I don’t want to decide if the loss is worth playing the game.

Non-Ranked Game Mode please

#82

Your link is not proving what you think it is. 1. It is popularity over time, not player base nor profit. 2. Even looking at its popularity over time, within 6mos (Jul 2013 to Jan 2014) it was up and has stayed relatively consistent (look at Jan 2014 to today, nearly the same). Compare this to Duelyst on Google Trends and Duelyst is down since either Beta or official PC launch (doesn’t matter which you compare it to).

It is not just the content. Sure, new cards and mechanics help, but as qeltar has mentioned there are really only two kinds of decks - tempo and midrange. Doesn’t matter the faction, doesn’t matter the keywords, every deck wants to do the same thing - control the board and win.

Compare this to HS, MTG or hell even Shadowverse. There are multiple ways to win the game. Some decks just want to go face. Some decks want to setup a combo. Some decks want to mill you out. Multiple paths to victory creates more styles of decks. This creates longevity. You cannot hope to win with mill in this game. Combo/control is very hard to pull off as players are incentivized to move towards the middle of the board.

2 Likes