|
ZIGfried posted:Even the lovely versions of DoTP have been well worth the money I've spent on them. I'm willing to give this a try and hope I can get another 50+ hours of gameplay out of it. Yeah, assuming you don't spend tons on unlocks and whatnot these games are so cheap at release that I have a hard time imagining not getting at least my money's worth from them. Still, shame about the weird decisions they've made with this one.
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 09:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 23:18 |
|
|
I'm hoping that cheatengine can unlock those preimum cards while also removing the card unlocking grind just like in previous years.
Andrast fucked around with this message at 09:19 on Jul 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 09:15
|
|
|
The rarity restrictions get more tolerable when combined with the fact that you can never unlock more copies of a card than you can field in a deck. You can't have four baneslayer angels because you don't OWN four. You just have to willfully ignore the fact that you'll never find another due to arbitrary restrictions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 12:53
|
|
|
Baneslayer Angel isn't even the worst offender here. They put loving Brimaz in the game. Brimaz, a 3/4 with Vigilance for 3 mana, that also makes 1/1 Cat tokens every time he attacks or blocks. That kind of power creep is just disgusting, and being able to run 4 copies of him in every white weenie deck would be terribad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
Jibo posted:[snip]  I'm probably in the minority here, but I liked M2014 quite a bit. There were some interface things that they cleaned up, and just the simple thing of being able to select a random deck added a ton. My preferred way to play was to fire up 2HG against the computer with all random decks. I don't have the time or money to play Magic for real, but I really do like DOTP a lot. Hope I don't regret this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
Man they've just been removing more and more features with every iteration, haven't they? I'm sad to see the premade decks go; they added a lot of variety and removed a lot of hassle from the game by forcing everyone to use decks with clear objectives, strengths and weaknesses. I can't predict the future, but my hunch is that in 2015 just about everyone will be running extremely similar decks based around 2-3 different sets of core cards. I'll probably pass on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
That was basically 2014 sealed so unless they've balanced it much much better, I expect the same. 2014 sealed was "play BW or go home" pretty much.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
UB was crazy as well. Nothing like facing 3 Runescarred, 4 Clones, backed up with a half dozen E Scatter and Murders from everyone you played against.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
This just released on iPad, was expecting to have to wait 'till next week. Downloading now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
So I've been playing on the iPad for about an hour or so now and I'm assuming the pay structure is going to be a little different then it is for the other platforms but here's how it is: Firstly, as far as I can tell the "bundle" says it gives you all "planar card unlocks", and says it has all launch content "except boosters". So at the beginning it asked me what color deck I wanted between white and black (as one deck), red, green, and blue. I've been playing white and black and after each new level cleared they give me a "booster" of a couple (so far the most I've gotten is 3) cards that fill basic roles for the deck I'm playing. So I'm guessing that the bundle includes each card that you unlock through normal gameplay. Whether or not this is all the cards in the game I have no idea but the fact that the bundle specifically says all content except boosters, I'm guessing there are some that you can't get through regular gameplay or the big bundle. Boosters are $2. I have no idea if they give duplicates or anything else about them because I don't really plan on buying any right now. The campaign is $10 (I'm guessing it just comes with the game on other platforms) and there is a $3 bonus Theros chapter so I'm guessing that's like a small expansion or something. $20 is the card collection that "unlocks all cards". I'm not sure if it gives you playsets for cards you want multiples of or not. The iPad interface is better than last time overall, it's more like the 2013 interface than the 2014 one with the sideways scrolling rather than menus. The deck builder is so bad. You can filter cards, it will give you your mana curve, and it will tell you how many creatures and spells you have which is all nice. However it won't give you a color breakdown for determining lands to add. You can't just have it auto-add lands like in 2014, you can either have it handle the lands automatically where it will put in 26 lands straight up even if it pushes you over 60 cards or you can do it manually where it doesn't give you any color information. If you have it set to do lands automatically and you start dicking with your deck and want to adjust maybe the color distribution or amount of lands, you're SOL and can't just flip it off right there, you have to go back out to the options menu and disable it then go back into the deck editor and fix your lands. Also the starting decks are beyond basic. Like none of the decks start out particularly good in the previous games but the cards are so dang bad. poo poo that's below curve with drawbacks and what not. I would legit put Scathe Zombies in my deck right now to replace some of the poo poo it comes with. This is all I've noticed over the hour or so I've been playing but so far I'm not seeing a lot to change the initial impressions people got when the details on the game came out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Jibo posted:Boosters are $2. gently caress WOTC.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
Hmm it looks like the payment model is different on ipad. I still want this and I don't know why.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
Laterbase posted:Hmm it looks like the payment model is different on ipad. I still want this and I don't know why. Well you can go through the first chapter and see if you like it. I'm not sure so far, it feels different than the previous games and so far it feels like playing really lovely sealed decks against only moderately lovely precons. I think I might drop the 10 on the campaign and see how it goes but so far it looks like if you want decent cards you're going to have to pay more than the price of entry to get in. E: Apparently the "advanced" features for the deckbuilder get unlocked after you beat the first chapter so you can have it auto complete your land and tell you your color distribution after that. Jibo fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Jul 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
I just started playing through with the Heroic Charge pre-made deck and the game itself is fun so far. But yeah, the $2 per booster is pretty hosed. I think that's $28 on top of the $9 to unlock the full game. If you wanted to buy everything unlocked right away, you are looking at almost $60! Here is the booster card you can get for the paper version: http://www.cardkingdom.com/catalog/item/194919 iPad version has some crashing issues for sure as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 08:26
|
|
|
It basically sounds like it is set up like f2p DCGs. I don't know how much hearthstone costs to play, but MMDOC is about that much if you're putting money down. So they're willing to trade more money from the product for less money from the product pushing people into the real game? I dunno, maybe they feel like they've capped on that flow for a while.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 08:33
|
|
|
Sounds like they want to have their cake and eat it too, two dollar boosters might make sense if the game was f2p in the first place. I hate greedy companies but I had fun playing 2014 and I'm not poor so I'm getting it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
$10 for the Steam pre-order, which gives you a free booster, then buying 13 boosters for a total of $36... that's not really prohibitively expensive, especially for a CCG. I still think $1 boosters would have been better. Also, people are saying that unlocking the non-Premium cards against the AI actually goes very fast, so I wouldn't waste money on the "card collections" unless you're really, really impatient.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
There's an AMA for DOTP: http://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/2ac4v9/ama_with_nik_davidson_lead_designer_for_magic/ Edit on 2HG: If there's one single decision you can point to me and say "IT'S HIS FAULT" about, it would be this one. Quite simply, I was very unhappy with the implementation of 2HG in Duels. The interface scales awkwardly, there's a TON of non-intuitive card interactions, (Serra Ascendant, Heartless Hidetsugu, etc.) and I didn't consider the level of instruction around those issues in-game to be sufficient. Given the focus on the deckbuilder and collection management this time around, we cut so we could focus on making other aspects of the game better. It's worth noting that the overall play numbers on 2HG were not large. It was a beloved niche feature, and one that I'm working to bring back when we can do it right. Edit 2: Planeswalker cards are not as impossible as I once thought they were. #nonansweranswer Tezzeract fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jul 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
Bugger. I don't do Reddit, but I'd really have liked to know if this was going to be a one off move, if they're waiting for feedback/sales numbers, or if they're totally committed to this model for the next year or even for the entire forseeable future. Because I really really dislike what this looks like and I've enjoyed the Duels series so much up to this point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
Sleep of Bronze posted:Bugger. I don't do Reddit, but I'd really have liked to know if this was going to be a one off move, if they're waiting for feedback/sales numbers, or if they're totally committed to this model for the next year or even for the entire forseeable future. Because I really really dislike what this looks like and I've enjoyed the Duels series so much up to this point. Here is what Nik Davidson said on the AMA about the "pay to win" and payment model: quote:Part of the reason I wanted to do this AMA is to specifically address this point. I strongly reject the idea that Duels is a "pay to win" game - one of my foremost goals on Duels was to control and minimize the impact of the Premium boosters on the overall game, while still providing good value to players who wanted them. Here's a few things to consider, just to get started. I know this is a controversial topic, and there's a lot to pick apart.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
Pawn 17 posted:Here is what Nik Davidson said on the AMA about the "pay to win" and payment model: So what I'm getting from this is and my experience with the game so far is that $2 boosters are the only way to get certain cards. The $35 special edition does not come with these cards, but rather the ones you unlock through gameplay, at least for the iPad version. So even if you buy the $35 "all launch content" version you are going to have to throw another $28 in to get the premium cards. Or you can pay the entry level fee at $10, unlock the less good cards through normal gameplay and pay out $28 for the premium cards. I have no idea if this is how it will work on other platforms, or if this is even accurate as I'm not getting the special edition version but it does very clearly say on the iPad "all laucnh content except for boosters" for $35. As an aside, they really decided to go hog wild since you don't necessarily get the decks the computer uses. Liliana was slinging Demonic Tutors and Kiora was dropping Tropical Islands when I played them earlier.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
If you have to make an entire AMA about iap payment structure for your paid game you know you hosed up. That said I'll still probably buy the base game, get sick of it in a week and be back to hearthstone/hex. [e] I wish it were illegal to name a version of your single player game 'the complete edition' if you don't get everything there is to get. DrManiac fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Jul 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Whats the best way to beat an enchant deck in DOTP '14? Got a couple of friends who play nothing but enchantment decks and they do pretty well against my favorite decks. I'm a magic newbie so easy on the jargon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
Yeeeah I think I'm just gonna make the jump to Hex. Bye Wizards, hope you don't win that lawsuit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
Xachariah posted:Whats the best way to beat an enchant deck in DOTP '14? Got a couple of friends who play nothing but enchantment decks and they do pretty well against my favorite decks. Since you didn't give specific examples, I'll give some basic pointers. I don't remember what were the power enchantments from 2014 anyway, hopefully you can apply some of this. First, aura cards. (The enchantments that are played on creatures to make them stronger or to cripple them.) The most efficient way of countering buff auras is to remove the opposing creature just as your opponent is playing the aura on it. I'll explain this in detail, since you mentioned you're new to the game. Red damage spells, blue 'Return creature to owner's hand' spells, black 'destroy creature' spells are the obvious choices. Some activated abilities from creatures work as well. The important thing is that they have to be instant speed (eg. you can play them on opponent's turn.) When you see your opponent play the aura, hit 'Stop Timer'. Check which creature they are trying to enchant, and cast the removal spell at it. The key thing here is that your instant speed spell or effect will resolve before the aura attaches to the creature, so even if the creature was supposed to turn invulnerable or gain +6/+6 or whatever shenanigans, it's going to disappear before that. The aura ends up in their graveyard since it hasn't got a valid target anymore. This is a very powerful play, since you're getting rid of two of your opponent's cards with only one, probably quite cheap card. If you think an aura is coming, it's often well worth leaving enough mana unspent on your turn, and instead just lying in wait for the opportunity. If your opponent is playing something like Pacifism (cannot attack or block) on your creatures, options are a bit more limited. You can always return the creature to your hand with a blue spell and cast it again. Returning the creature will cause the aura to drop. A bit more obscure method is to give a creature 'Protection from X', where X is the color of the aura. Even if the protection is temporary (say till end of turn), all auras of that color will be destroyed. Then there are the normal enchantments that aren't attached to anything, but just provide a global effect of some kind. These are tougher to get rid of, you'll just have to look for anything that says 'destroy target enchantment/permanent'. Don't play black, one of the color's defining downsides is the inability to get rid of enchantments. It's opposing colors green and white have the most anti-enchantment cards. Often you'll just have to play around enchantments. If you know your opponent is going to play, say, 'All white creatures get +1/+1' you'll want to trade his creatures for yours more aggressively in the early game, before they grow bigger. The above timing related things still apply, for example, you can kill a 2 toughness creature with a 2 damage spell before the +1/+1 enchantment resolves. Or wait until your opponent commits his creatures to attack, and then destroy the enchantment, possibly giving you blocking opportunities your opponent didn't expect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 12:48
|
|
|
DrManiac posted:If you have to make an entire AMA about iap payment structure for your paid game you know you hosed up. It looks like they eventually renamed the versions of the game from previous years, where people thought that they were buying the game and all the expansions, but they were really buying the base game and all the foil conversions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 13:04
|
|
|
The whole "Buy boosters for this game you already paid money to" thing is dumb as hell, but I'll pay my 10 bux like I do every year and I'll get my 10 bux worth of Magic fun. I don't play Magic Online because it looks loving hideous. Even the 1997 Microprose game looked better than that mess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 13:29
|
|
|
I guess any pricing scheme looks reasonable compared to paper Magic and MTGO. I have to agree the pay for cards model would suit F2P a lot better. I was sort of excited before this, and having not read about it (like an idiot) I had assumed I would have complete cardset from the gate for $20-$35. I *might* think about this if someone figures out a surefire way to get everything unlocked for $40 or less. I can understand defending the pricing if you are rather comfortable... but those goons operating on limited budgets seem doubtful to find this a good value. I really liked being able to play a decent form of Magic for dirt cheap. I guess I'll be playing solo AI games with modded '14 until I get bored of it, or if the modders can bust dotp 15 wide open without getting C&D. Why, god, why is Hearthstone starting to look like a good way to scratch my computer CCG itch? It looks like checkers compared to chess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
Vafthrudnir posted:I don't play Magic Online because it looks loving hideous. Even the 1997 Microprose game looked better than that mess. Have you seen the new client? The old guard seems to hate it for some reason or another but it looks a lot less like it came out of someone's basement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
nilumtil posted:Why, god, why is Hearthstone starting to look like a good way to scratch my computer CCG itch? It looks like checkers compared to chess. It really isn't even halfway as simple as it might look though. If you haven't already, I suggest you give it a try. It's pretty easy to get into due to the limited card base, but like poker it's pretty difficult to play well. Plus the first expansion will be out this month, that's a very good point to start. If you do, drop by the hearthstone threads, we'll do our best to answer any questions 
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 14:12
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:Have you seen the new client? The old guard seems to hate it for some reason or another but it looks a lot less like it came out of someone's basement. Only through screenshots, videos and lots of people complaining about its various failings. It does look better but it's still nowhere near a magic game in 2014 should look like.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
nilumtil posted:I guess any pricing scheme looks reasonable compared to paper Magic and MTGO. I have to agree the pay for cards model would suit F2P a lot better. I was sort of excited before this, and having not read about it (like an idiot) I had assumed I would have complete cardset from the gate for $20-$35. Hearthstone owns and you should totally try it. It also has the cheapest drafts around in terms of in-game money.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
nilumtil posted:I guess any pricing scheme looks reasonable compared to paper Magic and MTGO. I have to agree the pay for cards model would suit F2P a lot better. I was sort of excited before this, and having not read about it (like an idiot) I had assumed I would have complete cardset from the gate for $20-$35. You do get the complete cardset for 38$. The 10$ base set can be unlocked in 71 games, though part of the appeal is to unlock the cards gradually and tune it into your deck. It's also faster than unlocking 2-3 decks in MTG 2013/14. The premium boosters is a weird addition and I have a feeling it exists because they're trying out booster DLC. It'll probably fail like sealed deck slots from last time around. I honestly doubt most people will spend 28$ on the remainder 1/6 comprised by the premium set. DrManiac posted:Hearthstone owns and you should totally try it. It also has the cheapest drafts around in terms of in-game money. It also gets boring extremely quickly from my experience. Hopefully the new expansion set will help.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
Tezzeract posted:It also gets boring extremely quickly from my experience. Hopefully the new expansion set will help. This was my experience as well. I played for a week having fun and then after that I just kinda stopped and barely logged in since. I can't even muster the desire to do some dailies to pay for the new expansion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
Tezzeract posted:It also gets boring extremely quickly from my experience. Hopefully the new expansion set will help. This hasn't been my experience. Would you mind trying to articulate what about it makes you bored?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:This hasn't been my experience. Would you mind trying to articulate what about it makes you bored? I can't speak for that guy; but it's really just a simplified and streamlined version of WoW TCG, which is already a simplified version of Magic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
There just isn't that much to a Hearthstone draft. You can't interact with other players at all since it's asynchronous and they're not picking from the same cards you are, you're commited to every pick you make since you have to play all of them, there's no sideboarding for that reason (and matches are best of 1 anyway unless you happen to meet the same person again) and no instants, very little deck filtering and no activated abilities means there isn't much depth to play besides "pick the most effcient creatures and removal the RNG allows, pilot deck while awake". I basically didn't touch constructed play once I had the gold and skill to just play arena whenever I wanted to; it might have more variety but with the current size of the card pool I don't imagine it amounts to much. It's not a bad game, but it's actively trying to be much shallower than Magic and that's pretty quickly going to leave some people feeling like they've seen everything the game has to offer, myself included.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:It's not a bad game, but it's actively trying to be much shallower than Magic and that's pretty quickly going to leave some people feeling like they've seen everything the game has to offer, myself included. Basically this. I played for a month after release - got all the unlocks and even bought some packs. Ladder wasn't too interesting back then and arena mode got frustrating after a while. I tried it again recently and realized that I had no interest in the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
Vafthrudnir posted:I don't play Magic Online because it looks loving hideous. Even the 1997 Microprose game looked better than that mess. The 1997 Microprose game was great and I wish they would do something like it again. It's like a fantasy world where people actually play ante, and also there are dragons and wizards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 23:18 |
|
|
The crazy thing about Hearthstone is the mana system looks like an improvement at first until you see the longterm consequences. Like it's awesome not to lose to manascrew or manaflood, but there are very real consequences to decks that draw nothing but heat and can play bigger things each turn. Card draw gets way more powerful. Aggressive decks can still build high-cost combos into their gameplan because unlike Red Deck Wins they don't need to keep land count to a minimum to keep up an aggressive draw. The result is the game either demands you play very aggressively or play with the ability to do gigantic amounts of burst damage with little or no warning, because everyone else is doing the same. MTG's mana system requires aggressive decks to keep curves low. You can't run an aggro deck that can reliably close the game out with a 9 mana combo. Control decks will draw land a lot so they need draw power and card-advantage plays rather than the security of knowing they can freeze the board until they assemble a one-turn-kill, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2014 17:00
|
|