Let's settle this once and for all. Card combat, Good or Bad

You are right. I have been hopeful as well. But I have seen enough evidence that there is really no hope for a 180. I do believe there is some hope for improvement, but I am not sure how much. In that R16 session, Chris seemed to imply that having easy-combos is not part of the design. So, I have given up hope for that too.

 

Sometimes nothing new needs to be said. Repeating the same sentiment forces the topic to persist, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Looking back at the overland map discussions / arguments I recall a lot of passionate posts that were not overwhelming positive in regards to how to make the cloth map better. Lord_Darkmoon was pretty vocal in his displeasure with the cloth map. The discussions went on for months.

I personally don't like the random deck in its current implementation. I stopped using it a few months ago. I made a few posts about it, but am too lazy to continue, and have more or less resigned to the notion that SotA will probably only partially meet my combat expectations. Although slightly off-topic, I wasn't a fan of the way the Stretch Goals were structured, and lately I have some reservations about how the dev team is handling POTs. Maybe it's just me, but one thing I've noticed over the last year or so is a decrease in dev team response to hot topic discussions. Combat system definitely falls under that.

So while the same topic has been hashed and rehashed over and over, doing so at least keeps it fresh, and puts it in front of the dev team to read and think over.

Agree with you that positive criticism should be better, but honestly I don't see the dev team giving any special notice to those threads. If you want to make a statement, make it bold and loud. Seriously look at some of Lord_Darkmoon's posts. That guy knows how to raise a mob

 

Actually if you reread this thread and the other one you will see it has been very constructive. At least the comments from those who are making the case that the deck system needs to be dropped.

Taru is well meaning but he clearly did not read the messages in both threads and I don't think you have either if you are assuming that taru is right about the negativity.

Deutoronmy has some very long and logical posts explaining in very logical steps as to why the deck system is not hitting the mark. Those posts are the most constructive feedback I have ever seen from the viewpoint that the deck system has failed and how it would be better for us all if we had a more traditional system.

 

Rather than get upset I suggest you go back and read the other thread too, and see that the feedback has been quite logical and sincere.

I know how you feel because we all want to see this game succeed. However there have been too many solid points brought up that I cannot bring you up to date in a single post.

 

Here's the quote I was agreeing with, Isaiah (I don't have the "quote" function on my computer for some reason):

Tahru said: "We have to come to grips with reality and understand, that without a doubt, the developers have made perfectly clear that combat is going to have random cards. There is absolutely zero opportunity that is going to change."

I think he's right. I'm hoping they see the light and change their minds. They have in the past. But.. my gut tells me that they're "all in" with card combat and that won't change.. until it may be too late.

 

The issue with polls in forums is that they are often made by people with no idea about how to work with statistics (or sometimes with a very good idea of it).

You often need neutral options such as (I do not know, I am not interested in this...).
You need to be clear about answers ("Yes." and "No." are very good, the added " it is the best thing since sliced bread." and "it sucks more than a vaccum cleaner" is BS that media often use but those things skew the polls a lot).
You need to word the question very cerefully. ("Do you like paying taxes?" vs "What is the best way to finance public spending?")

And even if you create a really good forum poll only a fraction and this is important - not a random faction - of target audience will read it and participate.

 

I think the OP was just adding a bit of humor into his poll - but yes, as someone who has taken Statistics.. your point is true, Net.

Although, I bet the outcome wouldn't be too different in this case.

 

Oh. Well it is not too late now.

 

It was done by "The Grinch". That actually should include humor

 

Sure.

The total number of backers for SotA is 52,450.

For an average margin of error of 3%, and to achieve a minimum confidence level of 95%, a required sample size is over 1000 people. In fact, its 1046.

Even if you extend the margin of error to 5%, which is too high, you STILL need a sample size of 381 people.

So, unless you get a lot more people to answer this poll, the sample size is too small.

Check the math yourself if you like.

 

There have been at least 5 different threads on that very thing in the last month or so. They don't go anywhere because all the suggestions don't fully address the issues. It'll be like, "Hey, let's move the hotbar and glyphs around the character." Okay, so it's easier to see, but if immersion is the point here, how can I be immersed with glyphs popping up around my character? It's still distracting, and I'm still managing cards. Or simplify the system so that it's easier to use, which defeats the purpose of building a deck if at any given moment you only get two glyphs to choose from. There are some about auto-stacking and easier combos all the time and yet Chris continues to say he won't do that, specifically citing this example of a fix in the last Hangout.

Suggestions to fix the system have been popping up all over and are routinely similar in nature; they get nowhere. So when suggestions fail to actually address the issues inherent in the system, work to deconstruct or impair the entire point of building a deck by oversimplifying it, make it so that a locked deck is superior to a hybrid/random deck (which is just a hotbar at that point), or are specifically cited as "never going to happen" by Chris, then yeah, the next course of action is naturally "Then scrap it and make something better."

Thanks, Isaiah. They're rather lengthy text walls, but I tried my best to fully illustrate the issues in their entirety, rather piecemeal. We can pick apart how each little individual issue can be addressed in a vacuum, but the whole issue is greater than the sum of its parts on this one. Every time you try to fix one or two things, it creates bigger problems elsewhere.

In the Combat System thread, I've attempted to spell it out in practical terms, but then again, so have many others, which takes me back to what Tahru was saying: these examples of fixing the issue are out there. We aren't saying "scrap everything 'cause it sucks" just because we want to; we've brainstormed ideas to fix the issues, and more often than not, the system becomes either too simple or so convoluted that it's impractical with these additional suggestions.

 

Also I too would like to clarify my stance on this. While I do feel strongly about my dissatisfaction of part of the core features of the deck system I have a motive too.

Something that is very important to me is cracking out of our boxed thinking. I'm thinking of the community as well as the devs. We need to be critical because our thinking can change. If being free is our comfort zone then we never have to leave our comfort zone ever again.

If the anchor of our soul is our own made up ideology then it is no anchor at all. Thinking inside the box is unstable (not changing our minds). In order to have clarity of thought we need to anchor our thinking in something unchangeable and eternal. What we believe can change and will change.

How do we criticize something important to us and also hear others criticize it and while feeling angry, bothered, or scared... Can something deep in us is still be anchored to peace? Find it.

Right way and wrong way is not an issue if you are ALWAYS on the right path regardless of our choices. Sounds nuts but there is such a way.

 

If you don't like the card combat, just use an all-locked glyph deck - simple

Options are good

 

The locked system has atrocious cooldowns, even with max investment in a glyph, and arbitrarily penalizes users with higher focus costs. It additionally lacks the available glyphs because you can only have 10 locked glyphs as opposed to 25+. As of right now, you can also not stack glyphs for focus cost perks or damage output, nor can you combo, at least to my knowledge. So no, it is not "simple" and it isn't an option at all.

 

Hmm. I suppose it all comes down to your confidence level. LoL

I bated you with this question because I believe the answer is not as simple as looking up some sample size calculator. You believe that this statistics calculator is correct, but what did you base that on? Sure appears to be scientific n stuff. Although this illustrates how we can become dependant upon Google and lose our desire to make an effort to question EVERYTHING!

We need to know the right question to ask, not just what we think is right. Coming up with the right question is the hard part because we need to know what to ask.


Why is 30 a magic number? Freedom of thought can come when we aren't afraid of being wrong.

Check this out...
http://www.jedcampbell.com/?p=262



One thing for sure it isn't cut and dry and we need to be open to thinking outside the box.

Just because 30 samples seems small and common sense tells us we need more people... Common Sense is just a primal instinct. It is a quick assumption made by our brains. We can evolve beyond that type of in the box thinking.



Still want to trust your brain?

Don't feel bad or defensive. I'm wrong all the time. I am not trying to shame anybody here. In fact I hope that nobody on earth ever ever feels ashamed again. Real science is mostly failed experiments. The space ship thing wasn't a failure, never trying something new is!

 

Yes, I trust my brain. I also trust science. And the page I linked to was just a calculator to make it easy for you. The science is based off of accepted published tables. Look somewhere else, and you will get the same figures I posted.

30 being a "magic number" is simply a rule of thumb, it is NOT an accepted scientific rule. And if you think 30 people responding to this poll accurately reflects the feelings of 52,000 people...

Well, you're probably thinking a bit TOO far outside the box.


Don't get me wrong. Personally, I don't care for the combat system, but not for any of the reasons posted here. But my point was, and still is, that polls such as this (set up by some random user and only participated in by a handful of people) are useless.

And I certainly don't feel bad.

 

I hope you don't draw the conclusion that I am interested in statistics.

This thread is about settling this once and for all.

My hope is that we break out of our natural thinking.

Also there is no such thing as being too far outside the box. Once you are out of the box you are in the eternal realm! ☺

The poll is there believe it or not. The argument against it and for it is up for grabs but believing something for the sake that it seems right is insanity.

So the deck system... If they never tried it they would have truly failed.

If they still believe in it after the harsh criticism then I whole heartedly support them and would be happy they went with their desire instead of caving to the grumblers in the forums.

Also if they do drop the system I will also commend them on making a tough decision.


I have come to the place where damned if you do and damned if you don't is utter nonsense. In fact I believe quite the opposite. We are not damned and our identity isn't based in what we do or don't do.

 

It actually is simple

If you use a locked hotbar (all locked glyphs in a deck), then you are in the exact same situation as people who play something like ESO and no one bashed their combat system like I've seen here

With max investment, the locked cooldowns in SotA are not bad at all, you can still pretty much repeatedly fire off almost any skill you like every 3rd time in a rotation if you want to; in most games, that would be considered very powerful and flexible - and a hotbar with up to 10 skills is more than ESO players get

If I'm fighting the same mobs and alternate between my random and locked decks with the exact same skills, the outcome is essentially the same. The only difference is I end the fight slightly faster with more focus using the random bar but I have to "work" for it and I have to watch the hotbar closer during the fight

The cheaper focus cost (if you stack glyphs while fighting), better cooldowns and combo-ability for unlocked (none of which are options in ESO to continue the comparison) makes up for "more effort" required and the willingness to accept randomness - it's an excellent tradeoff; it may still need to be balanced a bit, but it is still excellent and having options is good

Either choose fixed and still have a good combat system that works fine and is effective or choose to accept randomness (risk) and be rewarded - it's a classic risk/reward scenario; the people who don't like the risk (or the loss of immersion or whatever, no games have full immersion in combat) get slightly less rewards; the tradeoff is that if you go with the risk, you might die in a fight that you wouldn't have otherwise because your heal didn't pop up when you needed one for example

 

I would suspect that the devs are tempted to feel damned if they do and damned if they don't. LoL

There is no such thing. That is just fear or some kind of mental block. Reality never changed.

 

I don't think you understand what "risk vs. reward" truly means. You're saying it like it's some marketing buzzword; it isn't. It has a clear definition: you risk something (your armor, your house, your investments, your character's life through perma-death) for the chance to get things that are greater (better treasure, better perks, more gameplay options to play with - like PKing or stealing from players). You're saying I should risk not having control of my character for the potential of more options in combat OR I can control my character but be so hamstrung by the arbitrary penalties that it's not worth it. It's a game mechanic that people are openly criticizing. It isn't fun for a lot of people and they don't want to play with it. The alternative is to play with an even less fun option for these people. You're offering two terrible combat systems and saying, "Take your pick!" That isn't "risk vs. reward"; that's just bad game design.