Card Balancing

[Franka_Scythe]

Love the game, there are some neat design ideas in there, but I have to say the balancing could use a bit of work.

The game is perfectly playable, but it looks like some of the (much) better cards are only kept in check by how much work it is to get them (how much they cost to acquire).

Meanwhile, some cards/strategies seem to be very underpowered.

Some observations, which you may not agree with, but that I wanted to put out there:

Lack of trample. It's all very neat to have a 20 attack agent, but if you have a card draw advantage you can keep a small(er) blocker in front of it all the time. The benefit to this is that hacker decks get to do their thing by shutting down the opponent and generating their points, but Big Stick(tm) decks are not particularly good without a better way to deal their damage than relying on events to remove the blockers. Some form of trample on physically strong cards would be good.

Haste. It's far too strong, especially when combined with the System Crash card. Haste decks are the perfect example of balance by cost (deck is hard to build because it's expensive but is broken once you have it). See my deck below. I would suggest that System Crash not return agents to hand, that's the most broken part (you remove blockers and get your Hasters back for a free attack).

Yakuza discard costs. Yakuza Soldier is great, but the top Yakuza cards that discard 2 cards to play are severely overpriced. Compared to other factions, that are just as good at self buffing, Yakuza are very weak. The discard costs should stop at 1 card, IMO.

Here's my final deck, as an example of a broken deck that hasn't lost a single fight yet.

4x Hostile Takeover (Elite)
4x Lab Technician (Veteran)
4x Open Fire (Basic)
4x Hedge Fund (Veteran)
4x The 9th Circle (Veteran)
2x Selina Monroe (Elite)
4x Nem0 (Veteran)
4x Blackjack (Elite)
2x Amtech Tower (Elite)
4x Satellite Uplink (Basic)
4x System Crash (Elite)

Total credit cost: 198,000 (160,000 from Elites)

Stall until you have a hand with Blackjack, System Crash and some buff cards, and then you win. The AI uses a similar deck, but is of course not as good at timing card plays.

[Anterk]

"Trample"... I'd find it far more interesting to see enhancements that focus on the remote hacker theme or tie closer to Netrunner then Magic.

[Franka_Scythe]

"Trample" was just a term used to convey what I was talking about in terms that people can probably understand. The inherent issue is that physical attack units have a disadvantage because an Innocent Bystander can block any damage they would do.

Meanwhile, the Hacker units can sit shielded in front of Innocent Bystanders and do more damage than the biggest, baddest, meanest Mech you can build.

There's a balance issue there.

[Frozen Ray]

It's ok for a game to have a few dead tribal decks (the ones that require you to collect a lot of cards with a similar trait that buff each other). In fact, it happens quite often in ordinary printed CCGs, and the simpliest solution is just to not play them. I understand that for a game with only 101 playable cards even a few dead cards is a problem, but at least the player can avoid it (and there may some fun for new players in discovering that the relative strength of the card is not directly related to it's rareness).

The biggest balance issue I see is the fact that going first determines the outcome of the game much more than the starting hand or the content of your deck. It's not a big deal in MTG, because the value of an additional card is so huge that going second may even be advantageous for some decks. It's also not a big deal in Hearthstone, because of a coin (and the card advantage also matters a lot there). I could list a few other CCGs where this problem is either successfully solved, or simply not big enough, but here it's just devastating, and the reasons are:

1) Cards are super cheap. One additional starting card is basically nothing, expecially since we can have up to 4 copies of a normal card in a 40-cards deck (so the player can get things more or less reliably). With 2 free mulligans, getting everything the deck needs in a first few turns is super easy.

2) The value of the initiative is huge, mostly because of how explosive the credits-per-turn could be, and how easy it is to convert this advantage into damage (because of Hasty agents, hacking and other unpreventable nonsense). It's not like the opponent can respond to the agression by playing an Instant spell or something.

3) To turn things around (and effectively swap positions with the first player) the second player will have to spend a card and 2 credits at some point (so the initial card advantage is also lost). Security Clearance + Executive (times N) combo is cheaper, but your opponent (who went first) may also do the same thing before you'll get a cance. So, being second in this game is just terrible.

At some point of the campaign I realized that the difference for me, as a player, is that the games where I go second are tedious, slow and potentially loseable, while games where I go first are almost twice faster and super easy. So, just to save some time on boring farming (especially in Arena), the optimal way to farm is to concede immediately and restart until I go first (and my starting hand is not terrible). Sometimes I know that the outcome will be the same regardless (for example, Arena games that are required to unlock the next tier), but I just want to finish the match twice faster.

This problem really makes the game worse, because the the player either have to suffer from the balancing issues, or make boring repetitive active actions to fix the problem (as in "restart N times to not be in a significantly disadvantageous position"). But this also creates a problem, because the opponents are not really challanging when they go second, and this is also not fun.

The potential ways to solve the problem are: coin, additional cards for the second player, or any other arbitary game mechanic that evens things out.

[Franka_Scythe]

I agree that there's a huge first player advantage in the game, but it was never really to the point where I felt that it caused me to lose. I very quickly packed direct damage cards to clear opponent advantage in getting cards out first.

However, I wouldn't want to play multi player with the current initiative rules, a human player would be able to press the first turn advantage much more aggressively.

[DoD]

How about giving the player who goes second 2 credits. So the first player gets 1, then the other player gets 2, and on the next turn the first player gets 2 and so on... That way it compensates going first with having more credits.

[Neojin]

Blackjack+9th Circle is hands down broken..Honestly Blackjack is broken period. I think the adds should despawn after they attack, or he should only spawn one add maybe. Filling the board with anything for only 3 creds and not using a support card is a tad op compared to anything else in the game.

[Mojo The Rising]

So you can min/max your deck and suck the fun out of the game for yourself. Isn't that like just about every other asymetric card game ever made? At least this is digital, so they can hopefully fix any such issues if they want. If it was physical, you would just have to start banning or limiting cards.

[Franka_Scythe]

Yes, and that is the point of this thread. To suggest improvements for the developer to take into consideration.

Obviously the game has gone through betas and balancing already, but a larger player base wil always find more ways to break things.

[roguemoonstudios]

Thanks for the feedback folks.

And yeah, look, this is the initial release. The game will have balance issues that will emerge as more players hammer on it.

The plan is to to do regular expansions, both balance passes and to add new mechanics, such as something equivalent to Trample.

Though, on that note, Hacking is intended to be a strong counter to beefy unit decks. Yes, hackers can throw expendible low-cost units down or drop smoke grenades etc to stall you out until they win via indirect OP gain, but that's the point. Every deck type should have some strats they're strong against, some they're weak against.

Hackers tend to be weak against Assassins or Boom decks, whereas beefy agent decks tend to be strong against those types.

This is by design.

On the Rush strat - yes, they're powerful when used right. But they're also a bit luck dependent, and they fall apart if they don't win early. Beefier decks will tend to lean a bit more expensive, so they're slower to get cards out early game, leaving Rush space to snatch an early win.

Generally speaking, the trick to dealing with Rush is the same as hackers dealing with beefy agent decks - slow them down with cheap units/debuffs/support destruction. 9th Circle is their weakness. Usually they can't score enough, even with Blackjack's adds, to win early without 9th Circle.

Though I'll admit, the AI is maybe a bit too susceptible to Rush strategy, not good enough at adapting to it.


On the matter of initiative, sure, the first player may have too strong of an advantage. I never found a need to restart because of playing second in a match, early game first mover advantage tends to come from getting into a lane first, and you can just concentrate on a different lane to the one the AI chooses to get into that lane first. But I'm open to tweaking the balance there.

Keep the feedback coming, I'm listening! And future content will focus on addressing the weak areas in the strategic space.

[Franka_Scythe]

The main issue, going through the game again, seems, to me, to be the power of System Crash. There is at most one AI strategy that can stand up to having all cards removed from play. Anything with buff cards loses the buffs, hackers don't get to do their thing, big guys are expensive to get back, yakuza have to discard again. AI rush is the only strategy that might stand against it, but that also becomes irrelevant if the player uses a rush deck with System Crash.

My main deck usually outputs about 28 damage on the turn I'm playing System Crash. If that isn't enough to win that turn, one more turn should do it, especially if I'm holding one more System Crash for another free attack.

[Librarius]

I have been playing a short while now and have experienced the going-first-wins thing. With my early decks I did not have good enough cards with combo's to beat many of the decks if I did not go first.

My main deck now is a mech/law deck that creams anything except hacker decks, and on occasion even those. Going first is no longer required, but it is still a huge help.

The AI uses system crash inexpertly, usually making things worse for himself. The even clear away my SAI pac mk3's with Reroute, giving me another round of stun.

Maybe the one that reshuffles his start hand the fewest should go first, and coin flip if tied.

Maybe the second to go should start with 2/1 credits (2 to spend, 1 max)

[roguemoonstudios]

Maybe the one that reshuffles his start hand the fewest should go first, and coin flip if tied.

Maybe the second to go should start with 2/1 credits (2 to spend, 1 max)

Those are good suggestions, I'll test them out.

And noted about the strength of System Crash/AI's weakness to 'Return To Hand' effects. I'll see if I can balance those out.

[Librarius]

I have also built Franca_Scythe's deck with the Blackjack-System Crash-+ to attack combo. It is indeed very hard, if not impossible, to beat for the AI. And the only deck all my other top decks occasionally lose to, if the AI has the right cards in hand. The only limiting factor is its cost, so unless you really grind that tournament, you get it only late game.

The system crash seems designed for blackjack, as it returns exactly 3 credits. This is to limit it after you can spend 5 credits, but it also alows the combo at 5 credits. Would you recieve only 2 credits "refund" the combo would be harder. But hedge funds and hostile takeovers can make it happen even sooner than turn 5.

Anyway, as there are no cards to help you defend against System Crash, this is definately the most powerfull combo in the game. I would like to see a Defense Grid against rushers, or a Backup something against System Crash or Reroute in an "expansion". Like the EMP grenade, only usefull against certain cards, but vital to defeat certain decks.

P.S. My suggestion to start with 2/1 credits if you go second should be scrapped. I now see the power of the Executive and Hedge Fund as well as Hostile Takeover. Any game against the AI a win with 2/1 starting credits would be a win, if I have those cards in my deck.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=754360226

Librarius

[FABIO]

Yeah, haste agents are way too strong. Too low cost for the amazing stats and immediate attack you get.

In Hearthstone, charge minions were balanced by being lower in stats than similarly priced minions, being fragile, and the fact that attacking enemy minions always meant you took damage in return.

Here, haste agents almost have the same stats, they are not that fragile, and they receive no damage in return for attacking an enemy agent.

[Gernhart.Reinlunzen]

I recently had a few encounters I lost multiple times in a row. This wasn't because of haste agents in general but because of certain combos. The thread opener listed that too. The fight was against a Metrosec Special Response Team which for whatever reason only consisted of anarchs. The pattern is always the same. AI plays System Crash or uses Reroute and Blackjack afterwards. In combination with 9th circle this is devastating because the AI instantly gains at least 22 points. Since my opponent uses this multiple times in a match I mostly don't stand a chance. Currently there is no way to counter or block that and it is really annoying.