Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Folkvar

  • Rank
  • Birthday 10/13/1975

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Athens, Greece

Recent Profile Visitors

218 profile views
  1. The critique has some momentum, nice. I won't answer everything here because I don't really care but I will address two things: 1. I don't offer free advice for game development. If companies want my advice on how to fix/build/design their game, they will have to pay me. Knowledge is not free and it shouldn't be. This is not a charity. You don't like it? Good. I don't really care. I spend lots of money, lots of years and lots of brain-cells to get my diplomas and master's. I won't demean my efforts by offering "free" advice to companies that make millions or billions, in the case of video game companies. 2. Yes, I REALLY love Dragon and no, I DON'T REALLY love attachments. I am FORCED to play with them because of the Dragon mechanics that are heavily focused on attachments. My problem is not that the clan is focused on attachments but in the fact that it is focused on said cards in an ATTACHMENT HATE meta. The same would be felt by, for example, Scorpion players if they played in a meta that favoured strong and varied honour-gaining mechanics, by Crane if they played in a meta that strongly punished honoured characters, easily, etc. You get the point. The recent Koteis and championships have shown that Dragon are last or second to last in each (my condolences to Lion players, I feel for you) and part of the reason is the restricted list and the attachment-hate. As a prediction on the future of the Dragon clan I will say to Dragon players: Don't count on the Clan pack. The recent Unicorn clan pack has shown that if a clan is weak to start, it won't get better or it will gain a marginal boost. The same will go for Dragon. The new "mechanic" that FFG wants to introduce (Fate management/mobility/something....) will fail utterly. It is too convoluted, requiring many cards to even do something and even then, that something has minimal impact in the game. The Dragon clan, like the Unicorn clan, ultimately was designed as a perfect splash, nothing more. Edit: I just remembered that I saw someone saying that it was wrong, in the original version of L5R, to put all your eggs in one basket due to the mechanics that favoured character removal. As a followup I will say that this strategy is the correct strategy in every card game due to the simple fact that this gives your opponent only one target to focus on. It has been true in all the card games that I have played and it is true in this one too. That's why Dragon was weak as a clan to start with because it focused heavily on an outdated and tactically wrong mechanic of creating a "super-character". They won a few championships in the beginning of the game, when everyone was still learning the new mechanics and whatnot, but eventually, the tactic went stale and predictable enough to be countered easily. Edit #2: Since the Krakow European Championship has ended, it is clear that the restriction of Spyglass had a serious effect on the Crab clan (which was the reason for the restriction in the first place)....Not....Day 1a Crab takes 2nd place, Day 1b Crab takes 3rd place, Day 2 Crab takes the title of Champion. Oh, and just to recap on the previous discussions, guess where Dragon is placed.
  2. So, essentially, what you’re saying is that before restricting Spyglass, you didn’t feel the need to restrict the Crab clan, since it was second-best (behind Phoenix, presumably) but now you do restrict the Crab clan (or so you think), even though you still don’t believe that they’re at their best but just “one of the best”? Fair enough, although that could take slightly more clarification. And on the matter of restricting, Spyglass…When you thought that the Niten Master and the Pathfinder’s Blade were an overpowering combo, you restricted both. Fair. When you thought that Forged Edict and Fate Worse Than Death were too powerful for both of them to be in the same deck (something that you should have seen in the play-testing phase of the cards, but let’s bypass that for now), you restricted both. Fair. When you thought that Isawa Tadaka was dominating the Phoenix game, you changed his text and restricted him along with Secluded Shrine. Which leads us to now, where you think that the Crab clan has seen successes revolving around the same combo of keeping major characters in the game, along with all attachments, relying in 5 Crab cards, to do that so…you restrict a Unicorn card…Do I need to spell out how much nonsensical this decision is? If you truly wanted to break the Crab old-style combo you should put in the restricted list either Iron Mine or Reprieve or both. That is how you weaken an overpowered combo. Nobody gives a **** about Spyglass. They just won’t play it and things will just continue to be the same. They will play Spoils of War instead for card draw. Whatever. It will be a minor inconvenience and the way things are going with all the attachment-hate, Crab players will probably say: "Good riddance." The game was not won on the back of Spyglass. Spyglass was the least of anyone’s worries when playing against Crab. 1st priority was to remove Reprieve along with Iron Mine and 2nd priority was to play around Watch Commander. Balancing seven clans is hard, but you’re not even trying, it seems. You just superficially check a few things and decide on the fly without proper play-testing and/or brainstorming on potential outcomes. And to the people that might come to this post with the argument: “Yeah, you’re all criticism but you don’t provide any meaningful feedback,” I will say: “My feedback for game design is paid by the hour, not given freely. People who want my advice on how to make money, they will pay me for it. Free advice is reserved for friends and family, only.” Have a nice day. Edit: I am still waiting on the solution that you come up with on how to make an attachment-heavy clan competitive, in an heavily attachment-hate meta. I really do. Also, the Daisho is crap, don't bring it up in examples like it's the next best thing that happened to the Dragon clan after Mitsu.
  3. After the results in the Birmingham Grand Kotei, I believe that the Dragon clan is still too overpowered, compared to the rest, especially the Scorpion. They need a couple more nerfs to their cards (maybe Yokuni needs to have no text at all and Mitsu should be a 1/1 with 0 glory at a cost of 6...just throwing out ideas) and they certainly need at least 3 more cards in the restricted list.
  4. So, how do developers (NOT players) feel about the state of the Dragon clan, in the current meta? Do you feel that things are "balanced" - having an attachment-based clan in an attachment-hate meta? Do you think that it is "good" game design? I'm really, honestly asking the developers (who won't answer, obviously), how they make their decisions concerning the way the meta is going to go. Honestly.
  • Create New...