1. Introduce the ability to ban decks during the deck picking phase. With 12 decks in the game right now, being able to ban one or two decks per player adds a new layer of strategy to the game without cutting off other combo options, putting more emphasis on deck synergies, counters, and turn orders. This would also force some players to diversify their playstyles, especially one-trick power rushers and Crow spammers (yes, that's me).

2. Remove the deserter penalty. Players should not be punished for forfeiting a game that they know will result in a loss, especially when the game is going to be drawn out for quite a bit anyways. Besides, it's pointless and easily bypassed by hopping on a different character.

3. Introduce scaling rewards based on match time. Forfeiting should also count towards those rewards. The reason why many players employ power rush decks and combos is because those games end very quickly, resulting in more rewards over time, and therefore disincentivizing picking decks like Almalexia and Alessia that result in longer games. Introducing scaling rewards would encourage players to freely try out those slow burn decks knowing that they'd still get good rewards from it. Players should also not be punished for staying in a long game that is being drawn out, so the loser's rewards should also scale up to maximum at a certain time.
Here is a sample reward table:

HatchetHaro wrote: »

1. Introduce the ability to ban decks during the deck picking phase. With 12 decks in the game right now, being able to ban one or two decks per player adds a new layer of strategy to the game without cutting off other combo options, putting more emphasis on deck synergies, counters, and turn orders. This would also force some players to diversify their playstyles, especially one-trick power rushers and Crow spammers (yes, that's me).

2. Remove the deserter penalty. Players should not be punished for forfeiting a game that they know will result in a loss, especially when the game is going to be drawn out for quite a bit anyways. Besides, it's pointless and easily bypassed by hopping on a different character.

3. Introduce scaling rewards based on match time. Forfeiting should also count towards those rewards. The reason why many players employ power rush decks and combos is because those games end very quickly, resulting in more rewards over time, and therefore disincentivizing picking decks like Almalexia and Alessia that result in longer games. Introducing scaling rewards would encourage players to freely try out those slow burn decks knowing that they'd still get good rewards from it. Players should also not be punished for staying in a long game that is being drawn out, so the loser's rewards should also scale up to maximum at a certain time.
Here is a sample reward table:

I'm afraid that giving better rewards (especially a legendary one) for a loss in longer games will lead to some players deliberately dragging out the games. And we definitely do not want more of that.

El_Borracho wrote: »

I like the idea of scaling rewards, except I would run it the opposite direction, so that faster victories result in greater rewards. There is still the obnoxious strategy of running the clock in order to get your opponent to quit out of boredom.

Unfortunately, that is entirely antithesis to why I wanted scaling rewards in the first place. If faster victories resulted in greater rewards, everyone would start spamming power rush decks.

Besides, running the clock to get the opponent to quit is usually something that a winning player does; with my scaling rewards, at some point, running the clock would start to only benefit the loser by increasing the loser's rewards with time.

It’d take it a whole other direction. Delete TOT out of the game. Or - make it so 0 rewards come out of it, even less than now.

Actually - even better - you don’t play TOT, and for that you get a reward. The longer you don’t play, the better rewards. Ty.

ESO_player123 wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

1. Introduce the ability to ban decks during the deck picking phase. With 12 decks in the game right now, being able to ban one or two decks per player adds a new layer of strategy to the game without cutting off other combo options, putting more emphasis on deck synergies, counters, and turn orders. This would also force some players to diversify their playstyles, especially one-trick power rushers and Crow spammers (yes, that's me).

2. Remove the deserter penalty. Players should not be punished for forfeiting a game that they know will result in a loss, especially when the game is going to be drawn out for quite a bit anyways. Besides, it's pointless and easily bypassed by hopping on a different character.

3. Introduce scaling rewards based on match time. Forfeiting should also count towards those rewards. The reason why many players employ power rush decks and combos is because those games end very quickly, resulting in more rewards over time, and therefore disincentivizing picking decks like Almalexia and Alessia that result in longer games. Introducing scaling rewards would encourage players to freely try out those slow burn decks knowing that they'd still get good rewards from it. Players should also not be punished for staying in a long game that is being drawn out, so the loser's rewards should also scale up to maximum at a certain time.
Here is a sample reward table:

I'm afraid that giving better rewards (especially a legendary one) for a loss in longer games will lead to some players deliberately dragging out the games. And we definitely do not want more of that.

I actually am aware of that. I've been thinking of a different method involving variable turn timers based either on time spent on previous turns, or time spent inactive.

4a. Variable turn timers based on previous turns. If a player spends long enough on their turn, the amount of time they spend over a threshold will be subtracted from their subsequent turn. For example, in a 90s turn timer with a 60s threshold, if a player spends 70s on their turn, their subsequent turn would be a 80s timer with a 50s threshold; if they then spend only 50s, their subsequent turn would stay at 80s, and if they spend 40s, their next turn timer would be back at 90s.

My only concern is how this basically nerfs slower decks, especially with the slow animation speeds ToT has.

4b. Variable turn timers based on inactivity. If a player spends long enough not playing or buying cards, the amount of inactive time they spend gets subtracted from their subsequent turn. Of course, there has to be a threshold, because player thinking time has to be factored in.

Make matches against novice NPCs shorter again.

I get curb stomped nearly every time against players. When I don't get curb stomped the matches last so darned long, they eat up all of my nightly game time. Even against novice NPCs matches often run 10-15 minutes.

I have tried and I've done the grind to rank 6 against novice NPCs witht he daily hoping to hit rank 7 so I could finish the quest line. God above, I cannot face the grind from ranks 6-7. 60 more days of it just to go from rank 6-7 with one match a day. I just can't. It takes me forever. Fighting against proficient NPCs takes even longer and with no guarantee of winning. It's not even worth doing for the daily reward.

Wild dogs could not drag me back into ToT with the match times lasting so long.

On the upside, if nothing changes it remains the thing that's cured me of my achievement hunting. Makes it much easier to play ESO casually without the desire for finishing things anymore.

HatchetHaro wrote: »

1. Introduce the ability to ban decks during the deck picking phase. With 12 decks in the game right now, being able to ban one or two decks per player adds a new layer of strategy to the game without cutting off other combo options, putting more emphasis on deck synergies, counters, and turn orders. This would also force some players to diversify their playstyles, especially one-trick power rushers and Crow spammers (yes, that's me).

2. Remove the deserter penalty. Players should not be punished for forfeiting a game that they know will result in a loss, especially when the game is going to be drawn out for quite a bit anyways. Besides, it's pointless and easily bypassed by hopping on a different character.

3. Introduce scaling rewards based on match time. Forfeiting should also count towards those rewards. The reason why many players employ power rush decks and combos is because those games end very quickly, resulting in more rewards over time, and therefore disincentivizing picking decks like Almalexia and Alessia that result in longer games. Introducing scaling rewards would encourage players to freely try out those slow burn decks knowing that they'd still get good rewards from it. Players should also not be punished for staying in a long game that is being drawn out, so the loser's rewards should also scale up to maximum at a certain time.
Here is a sample reward table:

Agree with you on all your points except the rewards by time point. A game is a game. I've long wanted a deck veto as there are certain decks I simply don't want to deal with, especially Mora and Sorc King, because they force the game to be played only one -- totally uninteresting -- way.

On Mora and Sorc King, the power in the former is utterly ridiculous and needs to be nerfed. It really isn't fun absolutely having to get those cards because nothing else in the game comes remotely close. On Sorc King, the patron needs to be rethought. Perhaps, like crow, it should be blocked once favourable. Otherwise, you end up with à deck building game where, at a certain point, players can't afford to build a deck because they'll lose as the other side clicks Sorc King over, and over, and over again. Those two decks drove me away from player matches together with player delaying tactics.

Defatank wrote: »

I think Grega was just making a sarcastic funny comment playing devils advocate. But if not, maybe we need to dial back the difficulty of the easy CPU opponents

Yea. lol I figured saying “reward me for not participating” was sarcastic enough so I didn’t need to put /s in there 🤣

I definitely like some of the suggestions in here. As someone who dreads ToT because of how RNG based it is (not a lot of deck-control VS someone like me who came from games like Yugioh, Hearthstone, Flesh and Blood, Magic the Gathering and Slay the Spire just to name a few). I'd definitely like more of a reason to play it.

Based on my experience I'd tweak the suggestions this way:

Set rewards to be of random rarity (player VS player only). You aren't really sure what you'll get when the match ends so you should be there simply to play the game knowing you'll get some kind of reward for doing so. Obviously the higher your ToT rank the higher the chances should be for higher end rewards, including losses. Something along a scaling percentage of chance to get a better reward based on your competitive placement. Can even mix in some kind of RNG bonus for longer matches, but moving it away from a 'guarantee' would disincentivize players from dragging on the games on purpose.

Randomize patrons, not decks. I think randomizing the patrons you have at the beginning of the game and then having everyone select decks based on the patrons that are in play adds a new level of strategy to the game. Some patrons are obviously going to favor faster or slower play and to have several of them in play at once that do this will change how the games strategy should work.
My current experience with the game feels like 2014 Yugioh where everyone just used the same 6 decks all the time. ToT feels like that; I don't see much use of the full deck range at all.

I don't like banning decks. This discourages new players from entering the game space without acquiring a large amount of them and feels gate kept in the same way that modern MTG and Hearthstone do. Without X amount of correct cards you simply can't play the game. That's why I think disconnecting patrons from the deck slots and simply randomizing their selection adds a more even playing field because it relies on patron-deck synergies and game knowledge. It also lets people decide to ignore the patron system altogether if they think they can win via a 2-deck combo alone.

Other than that; deserter penalty absolutely should not be a thing. I think randomizing the rewards and not placing any weight of them based on win/loss would make people feel more casual about the game. A good of example of this in practice is Hearthstone's missions that rewarded you for doing goofy things rather than winning a match like "Destroy 20 minions." or "Cast 5 spells". You were playing the match not to win but just to get your mission done and it meant you could play a dumb deck and not take it so seriously.

I could be wrong about all of this I'll admit that fully; being tainted by other TCG's can make my opinion narrow. As the game stands now pretty much all I see is rush decks that generate tons of power and ignore pretty much every other mechanic.

HatchetHaro wrote: »

El_Borracho wrote: »

I like the idea of scaling rewards, except I would run it the opposite direction, so that faster victories result in greater rewards. There is still the obnoxious strategy of running the clock in order to get your opponent to quit out of boredom.

Unfortunately, that is entirely antithesis to why I wanted scaling rewards in the first place. If faster victories resulted in greater rewards, everyone would start spamming power rush decks.

Besides, running the clock to get the opponent to quit is usually something that a winning player does; with my scaling rewards, at some point, running the clock would start to only benefit the loser by increasing the loser's rewards with time.

But unnecessarily running clock is one of this biggest complaints players have in the game. Encouraging that would make it worse.

I understand your concern about faster games pushing power decks. But I'll take a quick beatdown over someone running clock for a reward. I have better things to do than sit around 30 minutes for a ToT game.

Making the prize for being in the top 10% actually worth trying for would be nice. 10k gold and 100 transmutes? C'mon. You can do *way* more than 10 RNDs in the amount of time it takes you to get to and stay in the top 10% of the leaderboard and you have a 100% chance of getting way more gold (sell a couple motif drops) and transmutes than the prize for success in playing all that ToT.

I mean, I really like ToT. I play it most days. But the leaderboard prize is laughable. I usually play competitive until I get to rubedite and then just play casual the rest of the month.