Making fixed deck competitive with random deck: how would YOU do it?

The combat survey is over, and as our tinkersmith Chris has generously explained:

"Players are super polarized on random deck system with a very slight negative bias. Where as most results were humps with the middle in the 3-4 range, this one was largely a U shape with lots of 1's and 5's. This was really just a confirmation of what I already knew and will be trying to address. This does not mean decks will be going away. It means we will be looking to update locked decks to be more compelling and more competitive with decks since that is the real problem. Players feel they must play with a system they don't like to be competitive."

We know that a significantly large portion of the player base, slightly more than half, of those who participated in the survey are unsatisfied with the combat systems available. I want to know the perspectives and experiences of those using the fixed deck system and how they feel it could be improved.

As Chris has stated once again, "more compelling and more competitive."

I will be so bold as to offer my own suggestions, flawed as they may be, in hope of sparking some attempt at community brainstorming. Please know that these are limited to my own experiences and own opinions, that I am not claiming to be right, know more than anyone else, or know best. Above all I am a player---not a developer.

Below I will begin by giving my own overviews and personal OPINIONS on the systems:



Random Deck
Firstly, when I compare the two systems and attempt to pinpoint their strengths and weaknesses, the random deck system has the strengths of outputting far more damage. Not only can cooldowns be bypassed by drawing the same card again, cards can be stacked to improve their damage, and further have increased utility when they can be combined to create new cards. In addition to this, the random deck system bypasses the hotbar limits and allows an enormous array of cards to be used, giving it incredibly broad potential. The only weakness I see within the random deck system is quite literally just RNG and (specifically my own flavourful gripe) the attention-robbing whack-a-mole card mini-game fiesta.



Fixed Deck
The fixed deck, as it stands now, is painfully lackluster. You are restricted to 10 cards (a grievous limitation of space) and their cooldowns. You may not stack cards to increase their output, and you may not combine cards to create new cards. The only strength of the system as it stands is that you have no RNG moving your cards around, you can focus on combat as you know what your hotbar is going to do since the cards are fixed into place, but it is almost hardly worth it due to the arduous constrictions.



I am now going to attempt to summarize my points in comparison:

Random Deck

Strengths

• bypass cooldowns by drawing the same card
• stack the same cards to increase their output
  
• combine cards to create new cards
• incredibly large selection of cards can be used due to the random deck pool

​

Weaknesses

• reliant on RNG
• whack-a-mole mini-game steals attention from combat

​

Fixed Deck

Strengths

• insured you always have at the least your (very tiny) selection of fixed cards available
• you can focus on combat and the scene as you aren't distracted by the whack-a-mole mini-game

​

Weaknesses

• only 10 cards
  
• no cooldown bypass like the random deck
• no stacking cards
  
• no combining cards

​

Now, given you've gotten this far, how would I of all people propose to address these issues?

Firstly, I would not change the random deck system at all. The people that use it swear by it. It is already extremely powerful with its utility (huge potential card selection as well as combining for new cards), and performance (stack multiple cards for stronger output and cooldown bypass by drawing another of the same card.) Let the random decks have their stacks, combinations, and utility. At the cost of playing with RNG and the whack-a-mole min-game, I'd say it's a headache that's worth it.

What I feel the fixed deck could benefit from is a second hotbar. Honestly, just that. A second hotbar. NOT the utility hotbar, but literally a second hotbar that can be used in combat. Keep the cooldowns, but add a second hotbar.



Now, how would YOU go about making fixed decks competitive with random decks?

 

I'm just spitballing here, but running w/ your suggestion of a second combat bar, how about this: for every locked glyph one gets access to a glyph spot on the second combat bar (also locked).

For example, if someone chooses to lock all 10 glyphs on their first combat bar, they would have access to a full second combat bar of 10 additional locked glyphs. In another example, if a person chose to lock 5 glyphs on their combat bar, they would have access to an additional 5 locked glyphs on the second combat bar (the remaining potential slots would be grayed out). This would bring a whopping 20 glyphs to those who prefer purely locked glyphs and also provide a justification for the extras that the rest of the player base can get in on.

The big question is: do these type of allowances tend towards a broken balance? I don't know the answer to that as I am not a dev nor have I studied these things deeply, but regular access to more glyphs is something most of us could appreciate and would also help to stave away the stale feeling these small collections of glyphs (10) can have.

 

Something that should be kept in mind is that if two separate systems evolve (locked and unlocked), they will need to be balanced. As I posted elsewhere, I would like to see the fully locked deck option modified so that a given card can be used again as soon as the associated animation completes (i.e., shorter cool down), but that card can still only be used the same number of times per minute as is currently the case. This maintains damage per minute balance with non-fixed decks, but allows the player to use the card repeatedly for brief periods in dire situations, at the expense of not being able to use that card again until the minute has expired. It gives the player more direct control and more options. Instead of the game deciding when they can use a card, they now have that responsibility and must use it wisely. This gives more control to the player, as opposed to the current situation where fixed deck combat seems to be governed by an invisible metronome.

 

I guess fixed is a way to learn about skills, but everybody should go dynamic in the end or at least as quick as they can.
I am one of the players who really love the system we have and don't want any changes!
I am totally satisfied and the Decksystem and combat is one of my favorite things about SotA.
But sure i am open for adaptions and improvements.

@fonsvitae this sounds not that bad , but i guess you can not deal with the alternative of combos and stacking glyphs.

But to think around to satisfy the players who dislike the system it's a good approach.
Maybe make combos available for this 2nd bar?
Maybe a shortcut like alt-x allows you to send a fixed glyph to the second bar up to 5 times to then have a fixed stacked version of it on bar2?

 

As much as I dislike the deck system, making the fixed deck competitive with it is going to be a tall order, not to mention a never ending nightmare of balancing issues every time something new is implemented. Over time, by using the deck system, I can somewhat see it's appeal to some people, it's 'almost' do-able, if we could just get rid of the clunkiness and delays.

If I was in charge (ha ha), this is what I would do instead, to make the deck system meet the needs of the people who want a better responsive combat system that allows more player control and skill. It isn't that we 'hate' the deck system imo, as much as it is we don't like the clunky/rng factors involved.

Here's what I would do:

1) Speed up the card draws or draw 2 at a time
2) Leave the cards in their slots until manually discarded or at least extend the time by half
3) Auto stack stackable cards (not necessarily the combo's, just the same skill stacks)
4) ******Any card that 'would' be drawn that doesn't have a slot available (2 or more cards in your deck but only 1 slot it could go in, or any slot that it 'could' go into is already occupied), drop that card from the draw possibilities altogether so that the only cards mathematically in the draw are cards that have a slot to be drawn into.
5) Increase the non combat bar options to include buffs
6) Add just 2 more combat bar slots
7) Reduce focus cost of skills by 1/2 or triple the focus regen rate
8) Make the non-combat bar keybinds map-able by the players like the rest of them

In my opinion, this would accomplish the following for the more hard-core oriented combat players:

1) Speed up combat to a more reasonable fighting pace both during AND in-between fights
2) By Eliminating cards that don't have a slot to be drawn into, it would allow the player to widen the amount of skills in their deck without having such horrible odds of drawing a wanted card at the appropriate time
3) Reduce the need to look at the combat bar as much, because even tho we would still be using the deck system, there would be a lot more stability involved by the auto stacking of multiples, and the longer availability of the skills before discard, and the sheer fact that any card drawn will more than likely be something we want to use.
4) Allow players to fight sequences of mobs and not have to stop as much just for the purpose of focus regen or worse yet, have to so repeatedly run away from mobs because that one fight depleted all our focus

This could allow us to keep the deck system, only have one system to balance or tweak, but would add soooo much stability to it that most of us could/would forget it was a deck system other than the strategy of deck building, which would still be an important/intriguing factor.

The actual interaction of it would still have 'some' luck of the draw involved, but would so greatly reduce the need to watch the bar nearly as much, because I would always know that my rapid fire would be in a particular slot, the amount of stacks that were there when I used it would depend on the luck of the draw.

If @Chris would implement these features, combat would be so much more fun, and so much less of a battle between the player and the system as opposed to between the player and the mobs.

If @Chris would implement these features, I would shut up about combat altogether and just play. (not withstanding still waiting for/wanting pvp content.

If @Chris would implement these features, I think you would see a lot more pledgers interested in playing.

The ambitious endeavor to create something new and different is a worthy goal, and in this industry, not something for the weak kneed. I give great kudos to Portalarium for having the guts to boldly attempt it, and the thick skin to endure all of the criticisms. I just hope that they are at a point where they have the maturity to take the concept of their vision and dial it back to the reality of the functionality needed by wider group of players. There is always time later to dial up the creativity.

That's my 2-cents worth. That's what would make me feel that the combat system in this game was something fun to interact with. And that's the bottom line, no matter what any of us like to do, our goal is the same, to have fun. Combat just happens to be something that affects nearly everyone.

 

I like very much the aim of your post, especially the idea of auto stacking (how did that not occur to anyone before?), but I am not keen on:

a) glyphs lasting longer: there is a skill for that... Mind Lock; it is there for us to use
b) eliminating cards w/ out a slot to be drawn into: this would seem to only benefit persons who make non minimal decks; it seems like having ones cake and eating it, too as it has the benefit of a great variety of glyphs in a deck and no negative for this
c) drawing two cards at a time: I wonder if this is necessary; if a glyph is available for use, why rush things forward? also, w/ auto stacking, this may prove too quick for the convenience; easily acquired 5 stacks will be the order of the day at too quick a rate of use
d) reducing focus costs: I disagree; I'm no masochist, but I am enjoying the renewed difficulty of the game

The above said, I'll repeat my initial words on this post: I like the aim of your post. Adding 2 more spots on the combat bar and allowing buffs on the utility bar is a move worth considering; things feel cramped as it is. But of all, I especially like your idea of taking the burden of stacking out of the hands of players and giving some relief to the need to keep such a heavy eye on the combat bar; auto stacking deserves an in house dev test run.

 

One clarification about cooldowns here.

Unlocked glyphs have cooldowns now, and they are twice the length of the same skill locked. This is a strength of locked decks.

The reason you can cast a glyph multiple times in a row with unlocked is because you can have more than one of the same glyph in your deck.

The fastest way to cast a single glyph is actually having 4 unlocked and 1 locked.

One balancing factor I could see is a new mechanic that lowers cooldown. This mechanic could also be amplified for locked glyphs. So that 20% cooldown reduction for unlocked glyphs would be 30% for locked.

 

Auto-stacking cards AND buffs on the utility bar... that would be enough for me to consider the random deck system. Not joking in the slightest.

I don't think you should ever shut up about your suggestions!

 

I agree auto stacking and extra slots for buffs would help

 

+1 to "Auto Stack and Buff-Slots"

 

Locked slots are already very powerful ever since they made it so that they are charged to start combat and combat bar can be made usable at all times. Even things with very long cool downs can be quickly fired twice at the beginning of combat.

I don't think it really makes much sense to set the goal as being to make locked decks stronger relative to an unlocked decks, because using a combination of the two is usually the strongest option anyway. Anything you do to make locked glyphs more powerful is also going to make decks stronger that have some unlocked slots and some locked glyphs. Really the only way around that I can think of would be to give some sort of bonus for having a completely locked deck.

Also, unlocked slots aren't the only thing that forces players to stay focused on their hot bars. You still have to stare at your hot bar with a completely locked deck to see when your glyphs are charged.

I usually use a combat deck with 8 locked slots and 2 unlocked, with the unlocked glyphs all being very similar skills so that I can mostly just spam the unlocked slots without looking and use utility glyphs from the locked slots as needed, but not constantly. It's not as powerful as if I tried to make it perfect, but it sure is a lot more enjoyable to be able to watch what I'm doing when I fight instead of watching cards and cool down timers.

 

This is a good summary however, I feel compelled to point out that one can have a mixed deck, thus permitting one to balance out the advantages/limitations of both approaches.

The OP makes it sound as if players are forced to choose between one or the other, which in turn makes it sound like the devs must take action to balance something out, when players already have the ability to make adjustments all on their own. So there is a false dichotomy here.

However, if I had to make one suggestion it would be to revisit the cooldown periods for fixed skills.

It seems like one could pick ten skills, unlock them all, and assign one to each slot, and they would be able to be deployed much more frequently than if they were locked.

I often wonder if players who prefer locked decks have simply never experimented with simply unlocking all the skills but assigning only one to each slot.

This would be the most "apples to apples" comparison.

 

Yes.

 

Yes. Or even another skill buff that dramatically lowers cooldown time. The trade-off is that the fully locked deck player will have to sacrifice hotbar space in order to have that option always available.

 

I should probably clarify that when I refer to fixed deck and random deck, I mean fixed deck = completely fixed hotbar, random deck = random hotbar.

I know that random decks can have fixed slots, also. I also personally only play with a completely fixed hotbar, even after attempting the random deck both with and without fixed slots for a few days.

I worry about the balance issues of having two combat systems, even more so a hybridization of the two creating a third, unique combat system. It seems fairly counter-intuitive to spread work out over that many systems, personally.

 

Thank you for taking the time to interact on my idea.

My rebuttal to your points above:

a). Fair enough, I could concede that one
b). No, I feel it would benefit everyone. Right now, any person who wants reliable draws has to basically eliminate anything but their core basics and run with 22-25 cards. As a constant minimal deck size user, I would Love to be able to actually have some depth of flexibility with the skill trees without it turning my deck into a useless draw fest.
c). I could agree this might not be necessary at the current time if some of the other ideas are implemented.
d). I can see your point, but if we could meet in the middle somewhere we could both be happy.

Difficulty should be enhanced by the environment or by the variety of opponent, not by making an 'Avatar' so weak he has to stop and catch his breath after everything he does. What is he? Geriatric? Should his main weapon be a cane?

 

A suggestion I have would be the following and why:

Locked defensive and offensive buffs should have a longer duration and higher bonus equivalent to say a 4 or 5 stack.
This would lessen the need to focus on the defensive buff and focus more on the players surroundings.

Have all healing spells be given an option to be locked or auto stack. If the healing spells are locked, it would be cast at an equivalent to a 4 or 5 stack but have a higher interrupt chance and slightly longer cast time.
This would have more players freedom and desire to want to place more healing spells on their bars. It would also encourage more players to try the "healer" role. From what I've noticed, there have been hardly ever anyone that focuses on being a primary healer/support character.

Have offensive spells and attack skills auto stack.
With the reasons given by the previous posts, it would also mesh well with the dynamic deck system already in place and encourage a customization to better tailor each person's playstyle.

Have the icon blink/flash 5 or so seconds before the buff/DoT/debuff wears off.
This prevents wasted focus and more weaving of spells/skills to allow "combinations" to be created.


These are just suggestions off the top of my head. The deck system is a nice new dynamic, but is lacking on its own. By doing this, it gives a reason for people to lock certain skills and keep the offensive skills/spells to remain unlocked. This would also have all players better tailor their character to however they wish them to be.

 

Steaming right ahead; here goes...

In re to your point (b), here are some further reasons I don't favor eliminating glyphs from the draw cycle that don't have a slot to be drawn into.

a) say one had an unusually large deck and was counting on a process of the draw mechanic not counting glyphs that don't have a slot to go into... would this really help? in a given, planned for scenario, there are only a few glyphs worth using (i.e., being optimal for the task at hand); having a glut of glyphs in the deck and then in turn having a drawing mechanic which ignores glyphs that have no where to go is a recipe for a lot of sub-optimal situations... once the sub-optimal glyphs are taking space on ones combat bar, the system you propose would reinforce this sub-optimal situation, making the whole idea defeated in purpose (we were looking for greater variety and effectiveness, not situations of commitment to sub par)
b) moreover, even variety would be short fused because, though one may have so many glyphs in the deck, the above system would omit away from the field of possibilities as the combat bar fills

The combat bar and decks made for use therein are the effective bottle neck of skills in SotA; the idea as it stands works well and I like it (a lot). It could use some room to breathe and capture some more of our abilities... this is why I like your suggestion for adding 2 slots to the combat bar (which, btw, could utilize the minus (-) and (=) signs on the keyboard, making it a fluid addition).

As I had mentioned before, I also agree re adding buffs to the utility bar. Heck, I am for revamping the utility bar while in combat in the following way: once in combat mode, we should have a combat only utility bar which replaces the out of combat one; in this way, we can dedicate 10 slots to utility in combat (including buffs) and have a separate general utility bar for when out of combat.

As to your point (d) re focus, I like the r41 changes. We lost the stillness buff when moving or being hit and, though we are weaker, it adds dimension to our avatars and adds more incentive to group play (where else is a mage or archer going to find the protection necessary to cast or shoot away at hearts content); it's a healthy amount of struggle, at least for me.

Interacting w/ you and your ideas is a pleasure @Grumpy so thanks to you..

 

Simply put?
I wouldn't.

In what logic should someone who is using a static deck be on par with someone using a randomly drawn one? The whole idea of the deck system was to add some randomness to the combat, and some skill / personal preference to the hotbar/decks.
Making static equal in strength to the drawn ones, is absolutly a step backwards. If you want that safety of always knowing whats going to be where, with the exact cooldowns, then you should sacrafice a little efficiency to someone willing to rely on a more intereactive, harder to manage setup.

This whole debate is redicoulous IMO. If your going to have static up to par with drawn decks, why have drawn decks at all? Why wouldnt i just run pure static decks with quick swapping?

Now were going to have the *ideal static builds!* comeing up.. where there will quite literally be the perfect builds for every situation.
Gross.

 

Because more than half of the people who took the time to speak about the random deck combat system in the recent survey greatly dislike the system, and there is no "debate" so much as constructive brainstorming on what individuals would like to see here as a collective gathering of their experiences/opinions.

I don't think it is ridiculous to hold a creative dialogue to address what is considered a major issue, given that we are playtesters.