Get this 100% Turnmeter coinflip mechanic out of this game!

Prev13456
It is so annoying in Arena and it is known quiet a while now. Please fix this annoying mechanic.

Replies

  • Zombie961
    1780 posts Member
    Use a fast nest, meter removal plus daze will slow them down even if one gets resiststsd
  • Ultra
    3544 posts Member
    The coinflip mechanic makes the game more balanced (debatable) according to one of the dev notes where they tried removing the coinflip RNG and I'm guessing after seeing that not everyone can win on offense and people can actually set up smart defenses (which they detest?)

    they removed it
  • leef
    12639 posts Member
    i think RNG deciding wich toon with a 100% TM goes first is preferable over the alternatives.
    The alternatives i've seen thusfar are:
    • Who ever had the most TM prior to multiple toons reaching 100% during the next turn goes first
    • Who ever has most TM (above 100%) goes first
    • Fastest toon goes first
    Each one of those alternatives has downsides. I believe the first one is the most popular, but is it desirable? Lets take vader under palp vs Rex lead/biggs/sion+nilly for example, if any of those reach 100% TM during vader's AoE, or culling blade eliminating a toon, they would 100% of the time go before vader gets his 2nd turn.
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • leef
    12639 posts Member
    edited June 2018
    ZatyraJinn wrote: »
    It's so blatantly obvious that the first toon that hits 100% should go first

    so who would have to go first in the following scenario:
    280 speed rex(lead) at 86% TM, 100 speed maul at 93% TM. Enemy ackbar crit hits maul. Who goes next? Rex or maul and why?
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • ZatyraJinn wrote: »
    It's so blatantly obvious that the first toon that hits 100% should go first

    This eliminates most of the benefit of gaining turn meter. Zader, asajj, Foo, thrawn etc can help slower allies and even overcome a team which is simply faster.
  • JohnAran
    312 posts Member
    edited June 2018
    It should be whoever has the most tm above 100% goes first. This is just the fair, logical solution. It would also allow for much more strategy and finesse in tm manipulation.

    But it’s impossible (or extremely hard) to do now because the game has been balanced around a different system and changing it would most likely create a number of abuses and loopholes everywhere (and break characters kits in a good or a bad way).
    To be honest i don’t think it can be changed even though I think the coin flip is by very far the worst solution possible.
  • Kyno
    21300 posts Moderator
    edited June 2018
    leef wrote: »
    i think RNG deciding wich toon with a 100% TM goes first is preferable over the alternatives.
    The alternatives i've seen thusfar are:
    • Who ever had the most TM prior to multiple toons reaching 100% during the next turn goes first
    • Who ever has most TM (above 100%) goes first
    • Fastest toon goes first
    Each one of those alternatives has downsides. I believe the first one is the most popular, but is it desirable? Lets take vader under palp vs Rex lead/biggs/sion+nilly for example, if any of those reach 100% TM during vader's AoE, or culling blade eliminating a toon, they would 100% of the time go before vader gets his 2nd turn.

    I think any solution needs to have a caveat for situations like this. Any toon that generates 100% TM on their turn should go before anyone else that is in a situation to move (whatever that may be). That's the whole point of having moved that do that, whether one death blow, or hitting enough debuffs or any other reason.
    Post edited by Kyno on
  • Problem of this system would be unbeatable teams. On rare occasion you can counter at the moment super speed teams with a coinflip via sion/nihilus and other combos. They want a fluid arena and not 2 - 3 super whales sitting in front and just getting their payout for 1 - 2 fights per day. Lets not forget they want a crystal refresh to gain crystals...bad defensive is their win. Its also in your interest if you do not have superb mods to have this type of coinflip mechanic.
  • leef
    12639 posts Member
    edited June 2018
    Kyno wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    i think RNG deciding wich toon with a 100% TM goes first is preferable over the alternatives.
    The alternatives i've seen thusfar are:
    • Who ever had the most TM prior to multiple toons reaching 100% during the next turn goes first
    • Who ever has most TM (above 100%) goes first
    • Fastest toon goes first
    Each one of those alternatives has downsides. I believe the first one is the most popular, but is it desirable? Lets take vader under palp vs Rex lead/biggs/sion+nilly for example, if any of those reach 100% TM during vader's AoE, or culling blade eliminating a toon, they would 100% of the time go before vader gets his 2nd turn.

    I think any solution needs to have a caveat for situations like this. Any toon that generates 100% TM on their turn should go before anyone else that is in a situation to move (whatever that may be). That's the whole point of having moved that do that, whether one death blow, or hitting enough debuffs or any other reason.

    fair enough, next issue:
    Vader gets to go twice in a row, granting his entire team 100% TM by dispelling the negative status effects with his culling blade. Unfortunately non of them get to go next because the entire enemy team was already at 100% TM from vader's opening AoE critting vs opposing rex lead.
    So its either awesome 100% of the time if you're using rex, or horrible 100% of the time if you're using vader. I personally prefer RNG and just addapt so i don't have to rely on RNG on offence. On defence i prefer as much RNG as possible because that's usually the only way to win ;)
    Post edited by Kyno on
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • I agree that it would likely cause balancing issues, but if it were changed I would like:
    - If two characters reach or exceed 100% turn meter in the same turn, the one who exceeded it by more goes first.
    - If one character reaches or exceeds 100% tm before a second character does, the one that reached 100% first goes before the second.
  • leef
    12639 posts Member
    XKurareX wrote: »
    Problem of this system would be unbeatable teams. On rare occasion you can counter at the moment super speed teams with a coinflip via sion/nihilus and other combos. They want a fluid arena and not 2 - 3 super whales sitting in front and just getting their payout for 1 - 2 fights per day. Lets not forget they want a crystal refresh to gain crystals...bad defensive is their win. Its also in your interest if you do not have superb mods to have this type of coinflip mechanic.

    exactly, people dislike coinflips because they think it causes them to lose, but it may very well actually be the reason they're able to win.
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • Kyno
    21300 posts Moderator
    leef wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    leef wrote: »
    i think RNG deciding wich toon with a 100% TM goes first is preferable over the alternatives.
    The alternatives i've seen thusfar are:
    • Who ever had the most TM prior to multiple toons reaching 100% during the next turn goes first
    • Who ever has most TM (above 100%) goes first
    • Fastest toon goes first
    Each one of those alternatives has downsides. I believe the first one is the most popular, but is it desirable? Lets take vader under palp vs Rex lead/biggs/sion+nilly for example, if any of those reach 100% TM during vader's AoE, or culling blade eliminating a toon, they would 100% of the time go before vader gets his 2nd turn.

    I think any solution needs to have a caveat for situations like this. Any toon that generates 100% TM on their turn should go before anyone else that is in a situation to move (whatever that may be). That's the whole point of having moved that do that, whether one death blow, or hitting enough debuffs or any other reason.

    fair enough, next issue:
    Vader gets to go twice in a row, granting his entire team 100% TM by dispelling the negative status effects with his culling blade. Unfortunately non of them get to go next because the entire enemy team was already at 100% TM from vader's opening AoE critting vs opposing rex lead.
    So its either awesome 100% of the time if you're using rex, or horrible 100% of the time if you're using vader. I personally prefer RNG and just addapt so i don't have to rely on RNG on offence. On defence i prefer as much RNG as possible because that's usually the only way to win ;)

    I agree, RNG is not the enemy.

    I think as this thread gets populated we will see 100 new caveats that will show how complex this would need to be if it wasnt RNG based, and why it's not as simple as just turn meter.
  • FerLandrossa
    198 posts Member
    edited June 2018
    Random has flaws, but basing it on speed stats or most TM over 100%, or who got their TM full first would generate problems, including completely making abilities like thrawns, jyn, etc a total waste if time.

    In fact, out of all the TM gain situations thats the one that frustrates me the most. you TM swap from thrawn to specifically use a situationally useful ability only for enemy toons to move and stun/TM remove/kill the toon you just swapped TM to actually use. You use culling blade and kill, only for vader to not move again. Etc.

    I'm fine with it being random where its natural TM gain or passive ability gains. But when I actively use a characters ability to max someone elses turn meter, that person should absolutely go first. They could easily do this and simply modify those types of abilities to make it clear that they gain full TM and move immediately.
  • Kyno
    21300 posts Moderator
    Random has flaws, but basing it on speed stats or most TM over 100%, or who got their TM full first would generate problems, including completely making abilities like thrawns, jyn, etc a total waste if time.

    In fact, out of all the TM gain situations thats the one that frustrates me the most. you TM swap from thrawn to specifically use a situationally useful ability only for enemy toons to move and stun/TM remove/kill the toon you just swapped TM to actually use. You use culling blade and kill, only for vader to not move again. Etc.

    I'm fine with it being random where its natural TM gain or passive ability gains. But when I actively use a characters ability to max someone elses turn meter, that person should absolutely go first. They could easily do this and simply modify those types of abilities to make it clear that they gain full TM and move immediately.

    As stated above this leads us back to the "immovable object vs unstoppable force" we are seeing now with revives. Sith vs rex, the opening salvo besides the first move is all "unnatural" TM. They would never be able to word it so it can be understood without a 10 page dissertation. I also feel if they did. It would be a hard and fast choice that would just lead to one taking over and no chance for the other to be viable. IMO.

    As I said I do like the idea of that toon getting the turn based on it's own mechanics, but that doesnt help the thrawn situation. Thrawn definitely deserve his own caveat because that move should have the selected target move next, hand down.
  • Random is flawed. First toon in a sequence to 100% should go. If there's a tie it should go to the faster toon. The only exception should be for those who get another turn after a specific event happens.

    The randomness negates strategy. Completely.
  • leef
    12639 posts Member
    Random is flawed. First toon in a sequence to 100% should go. If there's a tie it should go to the faster toon. The only exception should be for those who get another turn after a specific event happens.

    The randomness negates strategy. Completely.

    It doesn't, you can work your way around the randomness, that is what i'd call strategy.
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • Kyno
    21300 posts Moderator
    Random is flawed. First toon in a sequence to 100% should go. If there's a tie it should go to the faster toon. The only exception should be for those who get another turn after a specific event happens.

    The randomness negates strategy. Completely.

    That's the issue, there is no mechanic that gives anyone "another turn", its gives them 100 TM. So you get a tie.

    Tie goes to fastest toon, so the one guy on each shard who has the best mods will always win out in that situation.

    Funny side note: mods are RNG dependent, so the out come is still RNG dependent, just once removed.
  • Random is flawed. First toon in a sequence to 100% should go. If there's a tie it should go to the faster toon. The only exception should be for those who get another turn after a specific event happens.

    The randomness negates strategy. Completely.

    This option negates some strategy as well, if anything you are making the speed secondaries even more of an issue.
  • Sacull_Kinslayer
    797 posts Member
    edited June 2018
    They made speed secondary an issue when they released them uncapped and untested.

    Any toon who gets 100% after a specific thing happens goes next. Thrawn TM swapping should be goes next.

    If the TM wasn't random you could strategic align your squad. You could set up your squad x before y before z. As it is you still can but it's random so that negates the strategic significance of modding. I mentioned this needed to be fixed for Zaul... Funny how it's now even more relevant... Especially after they mentioned it and deleted it. Quickly. They keep making the same mistakes... Whether with power creep, not testing things, or not listening.

  • NicWester
    6646 posts Member
    Eh. I like it. You either have 100% turn meter or you don't. Randomizing between tied characters is just plain fair since all characters at 100% have an equal chance. Having high speed is already enough of a benefit, why compound it by giving it even more power?

    Randomizing who goes prevents a situation where fast teams just get to go forever, which is only fun if it's your fast team. And odds are you're going to keep going forever anyway, since there just aren't very many teams out there that gain TM on your actions.

    Like Leef said--randomness isn't necessarily why you're losing. A whole lot of folks will blame any loss on randomness because it's easier than admitting they just aren't good enough or they used a bad team or their strategy was flawed.
    Kyno wrote: »
    That's the issue, there is no mechanic that gives anyone "another turn", its gives them 100 TM. So you get a tie.
    Wicket's Unique is another turn, interestingly enough. I first noticed it doing the AT-ST thing, Teebo would give all ewoks 100% tm, then when Wicket went he'd go again. But that's the exception that proves the rule, and other than him you're right.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • sipi22
    20 posts Member
    NicWester wrote: »
    Wicket's Unique is another turn, interestingly enough. I first noticed it doing the AT-ST thing, Teebo would give all ewoks 100% tm, then when Wicket went he'd go again. But that's the exception that proves the rule, and other than him you're right.

    From the game mechanics of swgoh.gg, it looks like it's coded to be: "Recover 999900% Turn Meter". Which would indeed lead to the question of should Wicket go next because he's gone way over 100%, or should a toon that is slightly faster go next. [I don't really care which and probably have a slight preference for random]
  • It's a flawed, lazy, and plain bad mechanic. Any excuse to not change it shows laziness on their part because THEY mentioned it so they knew it was flawed.
  • leef
    12639 posts Member
    It's a flawed, lazy, and plain bad mechanic. Any excuse to not change it shows laziness on their part because THEY mentioned it so they knew it was flawed.

    Or they wanted to change it because of player feedback, but when testing it turned out it's actually better than the alternatives...
    Save water, drink champagne!
  • Ultra
    3544 posts Member
    It's a flawed, lazy, and plain bad mechanic. Any excuse to not change it shows laziness on their part because THEY mentioned it so they knew it was flawed.
    You are the type of person that will be the first to complain if they removed the coinflip mechanic and start noticing that you are losing more often than before
  • NicWester
    6646 posts Member
    sipi22 wrote: »
    From the game mechanics of swgoh.gg, it looks like it's coded to be: "Recover 999900% Turn Meter". Which would indeed lead to the question of should Wicket go next because he's gone way over 100%, or should a toon that is slightly faster go next. [I don't really care which and probably have a slight preference for random]
    Interesting! Maybe it's just been luck on my part (or, more likely, confirmation bias in my memory) that he's always gone immediately after in that instance. I'll pay closer attention next time the AT-ST comes around now.
    It's a flawed, lazy, and plain bad mechanic. Any excuse to not change it shows laziness on their part because THEY mentioned it so they knew it was flawed.
    Yeah, but all of the proposed solutions are flawed, too. Basing it off flat speed is just as bad.

    There are often a lot of times where no solution is perfect, so you pick the one that works the best for the game as a whole. I know you don't like the random selection, but take a look around here and you'll see people who do. If they change it to simply using speed as a tiebreaker or using whoever has the most turn meter above 100%, all you're doing is inverting things so that people who don't like this will like that, and people who do like this won't like that.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Well - after the "bug" where enemies in Arena were doing like 300% extra damage (amazing how that was fixed within a day....) we know CG IS altering numbers on the defending teams to give defense a chance.
    You can like that or not, but what you are going up against isn't a simple random version of what it should be, power, dodge, TM, likely the coin flips, are going to the side of defense.
    I don't even know if I'd rather have that or a better AI, I mean, I guess a better AI, but still. The point of all this is that the 3 on 3 as exacerbated CG's defense teams manipulations.
    My guess is those numbers are being tweaked behind the scenes as we speak - until people stop complaining.
    #AcolyteShootsTwice
  • Ultra wrote: »
    It's a flawed, lazy, and plain bad mechanic. Any excuse to not change it shows laziness on their part because THEY mentioned it so they knew it was flawed.
    You are the type of person that will be the first to complain if they removed the coinflip mechanic and start noticing that you are losing more often than before

    Nope. And nope. I've played strategy games all my life. I would most definitely lose less.

    If I lose due to under geared, under starred, bad strategy, miscounting skill timers, using the wrong skill at the wrong moment, or fighting an opponent I shouldn't that's on me. Live and learn. However, losing because of a coin flip, is flawed. And frustrating. Anyone who actually tries and plans out their squads turn order and plans according to that order and contingencies based off said order knows this as obvious. Yes you can't plan for everything. But when you can be in complete control and your whole squad is at full TM and then 1 opposing character gets full TM and gets a turn cause of a coin flip and that cascades down from there to a loss... is ridiculous. There's a small sect who like random and chaos... That's their chance to win. I don't prefer to rely on chance or luck. It's a lazy and not a good functional way of conducting or producing a winning stratagem.
  • leef
    12639 posts Member
    Ultra wrote: »
    It's a flawed, lazy, and plain bad mechanic. Any excuse to not change it shows laziness on their part because THEY mentioned it so they knew it was flawed.
    You are the type of person that will be the first to complain if they removed the coinflip mechanic and start noticing that you are losing more often than before

    Nope. And nope. I've played strategy games all my life. I would most definitely lose less.

    If I lose due to under geared, under starred, bad strategy, miscounting skill timers, using the wrong skill at the wrong moment, or fighting an opponent I shouldn't that's on me. Live and learn. However, losing because of a coin flip, is flawed. And frustrating. Anyone who actually tries and plans out their squads turn order and plans according to that order and contingencies based off said order knows this as obvious. Yes you can't plan for everything. But when you can be in complete control and your whole squad is at full TM and then 1 opposing character gets full TM and gets a turn cause of a coin flip and that cascades down from there to a loss... is ridiculous. There's a small sect who like random and chaos... That's their chance to win. I don't prefer to rely on chance or luck. It's a lazy and not a good functional way of conducting or producing a winning stratagem.

    You make it seem like there's no possibility to set up your team in such a way that there's very little left to chance. I don't like coin flips either that's why i avoid them as much as possible. You're not in complete controll when the enemy team can potentially screw up your turn order.
    Save water, drink champagne!
Sign In or Register to comment.