Jump to content

redditThe Problem with Spell Bait


Soul Crusher
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

There are two ways to get a 50% win rate:

  1. Have a 50/50 matchup against eveything.

  2. Have a 60/40 matchup against some but 40/60 against others.

Both achieve the same goals, but give completely different results.

With the first option, games are based on skill.

Since the cards have no advantage against each other, the only way to change the matchups is for the player to have higher skill than their opponent.

With the second option, games are based on luck.

Since the cards have a much higher/lower advantage against each other, players can hardly change the matchups with their skill.

Without a doubt, the first option is the ideal way of balance, since player skill decides how interactions end.

With this system, the better player wins.

With the second option, this is where RPS comes in, since matchups decide how interactions end.

With this system, the better card wins.

When players have control over how interactions end, every victory becomes more meaningful because they earned that win.

Even if they lose, players can learn from their mistakes because every interaction was a reflection of their skill, and this makes player know that they can improve.

Therefore, it is clear that 50/50 matchup for all is the ideal method of balancing, and polarizing matchups are bad for the game.

So what if 0/100 matchups exist?

They already do, they are called Spell Bait.

With the very rare chance of players missing their Spells, there is no way a Spell Bait card can ever win against bad matchups.

When a card is guaranteed to have 0/100 matchups against another card, the only way for it to have a 50% win rate is for other cards to have 0/100 matchups against it.

With Spell Bait, there is no true balance, you cannot balance a Spell Bait card without making some other cards guaranteed to lose against it.

This is the epitome of RPS, and no one likes it when someone wins just for having the right cards.

 

Thanks for reading.

submitted by /u/Jake_Rowley
[link] [comments]

View the full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...