Around day 12 the builds start to scale crazy with available gold and plat skills. So if you go for a "rush" build that could earn 10 wins on day 10, but lost the first 2 days, you can get outscaled easily and end up with a bunch of 9 wins results. If you lost early, you either keep that rush buildpath (like crook+atlatl) and be content with two chests, or you focus your build on late game scaling and hope you get the correct skills offered to dominate the later endgame, to get to 10.
Just the sheer amount of love and planning that went into this game is just beyond belief to me… the artwork alone in itself would already be unreal IF THEY DIDNT ANYMATE EVERY CARD FOR SKINS on top of that🤣🤣🤣
It's good for 2 reasons, first of all the choices are simple and mechanics - are simple - anyone can pick it up, and play it, and have fun. Being engaging and accessible are winning attributes. The second reason it's good is because your choices matter, push your luck elements, the options give you a lot of player agency, and it turns something fundamentally engaging and accessible, into a game with a very high skill ceiling. Having a skill element at all, in an autobattler is very difficult to pull off well, the "game" of it plays itself - you're not playing the game you're metagaming fully. There's knowledge barrier, you can't know what you want, if you don't know what exists, which is perfect to draw in new players - not knowing what exists means you can't Want something you don't know about, you just see what is in front of you and decide based on that - minor inference from triggers and conditionals on different skills and items, you might suppose something exists, having not seen it, on top of knowing what the NPCs will have and the type of questions they ask you to solve etc. The comparison to Backpack Battles for example, Bazaar has a Much smaller inventory and it's one dimensional - not as a critique, it's perfectly simplified. Perfection isn't attained when there's nothing more to add, but when there's nothing more to take away. The thing that makes it Great - is the emergent "gameplay", the interaction between your very limited items, and skills, and number of permutations and combinations and synergy. If things were interchangeable rather than building off of each other it would kill replayability. You need the game to fire, asymmetrical PvP is a good idea to address this, no waiting on queues instant gratification, no one spends money if the game isn't playing, incentives to grind or pay money is a bit much - just the Ratio of time to reward seems off, if that is addressed at launch it's nearly a perfect game, I'd enjoy a fully PvE or Offline experience with the engine, and a handful of online elements are Too reliant on connection, you wouldn't notice if things are working well, but they become unplayable when there's a slight issue. Embrace offline play, the cost is so low compared to the number of players it'd bring in to the game. If you have to split the client off entirely, and sell it as a standalone game - do it, if you can enable that with the current client cheaper - even better, seems like such a gamble to automatically remove yourself from a whole group of potential customers - it's not an ad based revenue model it doesn't Need to be online only.
I clicked diamond items a couple times and got lucky once with a fort that actually got me to 10. Otherwise it's only relevant if you want more than 20 gold and no exp, which is a scennario I'm fairly sceptical in happening.
great commentary overall, I will say, I think the problems with Dooley are a bit exaggerated. I have been very consistently climbing ranked with him and get 10 wins more than enough to go infinite in ranked.
Bro, said poison needs counter play? When he wins against poison venessa 70% of the time. And Venessa only has 2 good builds and pyg has shitloads of crazy builds.
There is a really fundamental problem with many of these asynchronous autobattlers, which is that the entire game is reduced to matchmaking. Fights against ghosts are perfectly predictable, so the backend knows whether you're going to win or lose before you even see their board. Essentially the entire game, winning or losing, your streak length, are all fake and decidable upfront.
How are they predictable? I had a bunch of fights lost because the opponents instant freeze item hit my Atlatl/Bird with a 1 in 6 chance, meaning i can't trigger the armor buff from skills with the yoyo, or the slow with marbles. Basically losing 1 in 6 fights, but winning the other 5 because something else got frozen.
@@Psi-Storm I think what he's trying to say is that 1in6 chance is determined upfront and can be calculated in a few seconds since there is no player input. Basically meaning matchmaking decided who won/lost
Ah yes this guy again. Even if it's true that runs are seeded and any seleciton of options you have is predetermined. So what? How does it make a difference whether backend can know who will win and who will lose but players will not know? Games like this are about players making choices based on incomplete information (what encounters/choices will come up next), how does the fact that the server has complete information make the experience or competitiveness less real? That's like saying because audience knows the cards in professional poker and knows each player's odds going into it, professional poker is "fake and decidable upfront". Seriously the most fakedeep analysis I've read and see you posting this everywhere. Of all the interesting problems there are with core game design, you harp on this one?
@@Psi-Storm Because games use pseudo-random number generation and the seeds are determined in the cloud, where they can re-run your match deterministically every time.
@@SecretCrocodile If you went to a poker hall and you found out the House is able to stack the deck to choose who wins with 100% accuracy, would you keep going there? It depends, right? Are they going to stack the deck in *your* favor? Then yes. Else, no. And so when you have this pattern, and you have a company who stands to make money off you by feeding your dopamine release, it is maybe a good idea to think about the impact of such a system. Separately, I have no idea who you are. I've shared this thought exactly one time prior on Kripp's stream lol. There is no need to be upset about my acknowledgment of a fundamental game design antipattern. The result of the game is not tied to player skill and choices through the stages. The result of the game is 100% up to the matchmaking algorithm in the background. That is fundamentally not good.
Around day 12 the builds start to scale crazy with available gold and plat skills. So if you go for a "rush" build that could earn 10 wins on day 10, but lost the first 2 days, you can get outscaled easily and end up with a bunch of 9 wins results. If you lost early, you either keep that rush buildpath (like crook+atlatl) and be content with two chests, or you focus your build on late game scaling and hope you get the correct skills offered to dominate the later endgame, to get to 10.
Just the sheer amount of love and planning that went into this game is just beyond belief to me… the artwork alone in itself would already be unreal IF THEY DIDNT ANYMATE EVERY CARD FOR SKINS on top of that🤣🤣🤣
It's good for 2 reasons, first of all the choices are simple and mechanics - are simple - anyone can pick it up, and play it, and have fun. Being engaging and accessible are winning attributes. The second reason it's good is because your choices matter, push your luck elements, the options give you a lot of player agency, and it turns something fundamentally engaging and accessible, into a game with a very high skill ceiling. Having a skill element at all, in an autobattler is very difficult to pull off well, the "game" of it plays itself - you're not playing the game you're metagaming fully. There's knowledge barrier, you can't know what you want, if you don't know what exists, which is perfect to draw in new players - not knowing what exists means you can't Want something you don't know about, you just see what is in front of you and decide based on that - minor inference from triggers and conditionals on different skills and items, you might suppose something exists, having not seen it, on top of knowing what the NPCs will have and the type of questions they ask you to solve etc.
The comparison to Backpack Battles for example, Bazaar has a Much smaller inventory and it's one dimensional - not as a critique, it's perfectly simplified. Perfection isn't attained when there's nothing more to add, but when there's nothing more to take away. The thing that makes it Great - is the emergent "gameplay", the interaction between your very limited items, and skills, and number of permutations and combinations and synergy. If things were interchangeable rather than building off of each other it would kill replayability. You need the game to fire, asymmetrical PvP is a good idea to address this, no waiting on queues instant gratification, no one spends money if the game isn't playing, incentives to grind or pay money is a bit much - just the Ratio of time to reward seems off, if that is addressed at launch it's nearly a perfect game, I'd enjoy a fully PvE or Offline experience with the engine, and a handful of online elements are Too reliant on connection, you wouldn't notice if things are working well, but they become unplayable when there's a slight issue. Embrace offline play, the cost is so low compared to the number of players it'd bring in to the game. If you have to split the client off entirely, and sell it as a standalone game - do it, if you can enable that with the current client cheaper - even better, seems like such a gamble to automatically remove yourself from a whole group of potential customers - it's not an ad based revenue model it doesn't Need to be online only.
Currently best auto battler with bright future
If you make this a regular podcast, you have at least 1 viewer from me. Thanks!
I clicked diamond items a couple times and got lucky once with a fort that actually got me to 10. Otherwise it's only relevant if you want more than 20 gold and no exp, which is a scennario I'm fairly sceptical in happening.
great commentary overall, I will say, I think the problems with Dooley are a bit exaggerated. I have been very consistently climbing ranked with him and get 10 wins more than enough to go infinite in ranked.
I think it's just a steeper learning curve in general. unless you play dual core. i can do that one haha
Bro, said poison needs counter play? When he wins against poison venessa 70% of the time. And Venessa only has 2 good builds and pyg has shitloads of crazy builds.
70% is really good lol
Interesting video, does your co host have a channel?
not really. if he starts posting we will let you know
do we still have no date of the official launch?
open beta in december, full release in Jan. i don't think exact dates are out
There is a really fundamental problem with many of these asynchronous autobattlers, which is that the entire game is reduced to matchmaking. Fights against ghosts are perfectly predictable, so the backend knows whether you're going to win or lose before you even see their board. Essentially the entire game, winning or losing, your streak length, are all fake and decidable upfront.
How are they predictable? I had a bunch of fights lost because the opponents instant freeze item hit my Atlatl/Bird with a 1 in 6 chance, meaning i can't trigger the armor buff from skills with the yoyo, or the slow with marbles. Basically losing 1 in 6 fights, but winning the other 5 because something else got frozen.
@@Psi-Storm I think what he's trying to say is that 1in6 chance is determined upfront and can be calculated in a few seconds since there is no player input. Basically meaning matchmaking decided who won/lost
Ah yes this guy again. Even if it's true that runs are seeded and any seleciton of options you have is predetermined. So what? How does it make a difference whether backend can know who will win and who will lose but players will not know? Games like this are about players making choices based on incomplete information (what encounters/choices will come up next), how does the fact that the server has complete information make the experience or competitiveness less real?
That's like saying because audience knows the cards in professional poker and knows each player's odds going into it, professional poker is "fake and decidable upfront".
Seriously the most fakedeep analysis I've read and see you posting this everywhere. Of all the interesting problems there are with core game design, you harp on this one?
@@Psi-Storm Because games use pseudo-random number generation and the seeds are determined in the cloud, where they can re-run your match deterministically every time.
@@SecretCrocodile If you went to a poker hall and you found out the House is able to stack the deck to choose who wins with 100% accuracy, would you keep going there?
It depends, right? Are they going to stack the deck in *your* favor? Then yes. Else, no.
And so when you have this pattern, and you have a company who stands to make money off you by feeding your dopamine release, it is maybe a good idea to think about the impact of such a system.
Separately, I have no idea who you are. I've shared this thought exactly one time prior on Kripp's stream lol. There is no need to be upset about my acknowledgment of a fundamental game design antipattern.
The result of the game is not tied to player skill and choices through the stages. The result of the game is 100% up to the matchmaking algorithm in the background. That is fundamentally not good.