I love this idea, but to play DEV-ils advocate (Devs, get it?) this could adversely affect their sales. Imagine if they had made Angelion a 16 and exploding kitten a 13 (like they should), then people would have a quantifiable reason to be ticked about hatching the 13 instead of the 16.
People would also be less inclined to roll for a new monster the devs had labeled a 13 or 14 when other festivals have 16 or 17.
For the quality of the game, I hope they implement your idea, KD, but I bet they follow their checkbook instead.
Yeah this is an interesting point. Assume they went the full way and let legendaries range from 16-30 cost (15+1 as minimum with secret skill). If they brought out two new monsters with 25+ cost then it might seem more appealing than two which were 16-20, clearly the former monsters are far stronger. Also, in specific festivals with two new monsters there may be one which is 16 cost and the other with 30 cost. People may really want the awesome 30 cost monster but get the 16 which is probably just a situation-ally useful one.
However, I think that what weâd find is people would focus on the âvalue per costâ of a legendary, once theyâve got a small collection already. Some of those lower cost legendaries will be incredibly good for a particular team and people may like them more than a high cost legendary which will just take up too much of the team cost. Also, if people do get frustrated by any festivals with two new monsters that are very different in cost then the Devs could simply make sure they only release pairs that are similar in cost (as weâve been asking for them to do anyway - releasing two monsters of similar strength each time).
Could aslo make varying cost, since its tough to know a monsters exact cost. Especially when some of them require a particular setup to do something . e.g. cost this much but when paired with this or this or this; cost goes up by a different amount for each or something.
Or costs this much if you use this in your front line or this if you use the monster later. I guess theres a lot of variables to think about.
Like for boilerpipe, sanctistag i think is good in one vs one, since its got camo so is protected from sleep. Then spam death sentence and sleep all and you might get 2 kills from it and save a lot of your monsters. Since its also auto protect. i always find it a pain since i cant assasinate it. So cost of it should be higher in that kind of team. I definitly dont think cost should be static if your changing to diff costing scheme.
Something the devs could do for new monsters is force them to costs the lowest amount when they come out, than decide a more effective cost later once summon event is done. Than you dont have that problem of estimating their value. i.e. nerf em by increasing cost once summon event is done.
Soeach time theres an egg which features a limited legend, cost for that legend is set to x for all, than increase cost once summon is done or once community finishes nagging about the legend (if its a new one)
This type of costing sounds like it only works for pvp though but who knows. Maybe you want to make pve harder as well and do it there too .
I think youâre mixing up Sanctallion and sanctistag. Sanctistag is worth way more than Sanctallion.
But, I think you are on to something. Release new legends at 13+2, and after a month adjust their team cost based on performance. This way devs still get money, and we get a more balanced cost system.
Yeah he meant Sanctistag, I edited his post for him but you were too quick to reply!
That post-release cost adjustment is a good idea but it needs to work the other way around. Set the cost high, then reduce later on once they know what would suit it. Buffs rather than nerfs⌠much better way to do it. However, it might still irritate some people as they donât know what the true cost of a new monster will be when it is being released and it might not get reduced by as much as they hope.
Probably the best way is the Devs set the cost at what they think is appropriate and have the tagline âall costs are subject to change within the first month since the monsterâs releaseâ. So they look at how it does and listen to some player feedback then adjust as necessary and if the cost gets increased then they give out, say, 5 compensation gems to all those with it on their account. Hopefully the Devs would be accurate enough each time but the tagline is there to cover themselves and make it more accepted by the community that some changes may occur.
And this topic was getting out of hand into costing,what should devs do, etc
The main point here
Was certain skills needed in the game.
Was confident strike not powerful enough that it needed a buff to overconfident strike.
Was sleep entrance not good enough that it needed stun entrance too.
Way old monster have to wait 400 seconds to cast 400 seconds boom while newer monster do them in a insta.
you know another way to deal with this power creep is to buff old legends, something that nobody wants to do and i dont know why. they are by far the most common legends people have and any buff to them will be good and help the power creep. if your ap can counter magma then its good because every one has an ap. and we have been asking for their buufs for a long time already. Maybe the devs should pause updates for a while and release patched that focus on buffing the old monsters and bring them to a moderate Power level as compared to legends now a days. i am not saying buff them to be stronger than BB but in a meta of repulse and double poison eater. anything the AP do is useless. their tu is high and only thing they offer is stun immunity. there are better legends out their i.e Oak who is better than the AP in anyway. So a buff to all the old monsters will do wonders for the power creep situations as almost everyone will have a monster taht can atleast stand up to them.
This power creep is what makes this game interesting, new legends are released to intrigue the audience, as the new audience is coming so does new legends,
Magma didnât need any nerf at first place but since we complain so much , it was nerfed, and still it requires a nerf. Jeez, I donât own magma but damn I havenât lost to one single magma user in PvP who uses it to perfection,!! Maybe I wasnât matched up with some players who did use it. But still it has counters. Everything has its own counter,
The real game breaking ones were deathgazer, chronozeros, Midas-tt combo, geo/saint/motor, etc
Now there are so many legends with all unique movesets you can build so many different teams with them that it makes you wanna play & see for yourself how it does,
Now some players donât have some particular legends which can help them counter stuff, but jeez it took me almost 2 years to be this competitive without pouring money into this game .
Have some damn patience in yourself. Coz if you canât be p2w, and you canât wait, then only real options remains is to nerf this legend , it is broken , it cannot be countered.
Power creep is always going to happen. 2 years down the line we canât still be using stun entrance in 5th and a last biter at the end of every team as the game would of completely died by people being bored of it
Yeah Saul1417 hit the nail on the head. Power creep has to happen in these games to keep things fresh and interesting. It also has a nice balancing effect for newer players coming in and getting strong monsters so they can somewhat compete with the older players who have a ridiculous 40+ legendaries or something.
If you want to go see power creep handled well over the space of many years go do some research on Magic the Gathering. Many of the things done in there have been adopted by Neo Monsters, âlink movesâ being a particular highlight (similar to the way MTG limits use of cards to only being used with cards from a few set releases either side).
After some research today into power creep and thinking about how everything has been handled in NM I have come up with a few things they do well:
General game-winning strategies (e.g. poison, mortar, stun) are developed and kept balanced very nicely over time, meaning a huge diversity of viable teams can be created and there is a large amount of flexibility which allows for some overpowered combos.
The standard set for moves in terms of damage and TU is kept under control very well, with certain moves that require extra conditions being lower TU and ones that play into a easily-accessible strategy being higher TU. E.g. single/double killing moves with âstandardâ level of setup are 130/160TU with raw/link being 70-100TU and poison being 160/200TU.
Secret skills are added to older, out-dated monsters to give them extra uses in current teams. These typically donât make them as strong as the new monsters unless intentional (e.g. for some limited monsters).
They make a good effort to âwidenâ with expansions by adding things like mortar monsters and skills like repent instead of expanding in a âtallâ way where they simply improve whatâs already there.
One of the core parts of MTG power creep control is the way how they cycle in and cycle out particular game mechanics. This allows them to create some powerful combos which later on see enough counters that new combos appear more powerful, without them actually being any stronger than the older ones. Neo Monsters does this too but this design technique does rely somewhat on there not being any stand-alone powerful monsters which work in any team, thereby pulling the focus from powerful combos and forcing the game into a power creep so combos are stronger than what individual monsters can achieve. Where Neo Monsters is going wrong here is with the power creep on passives, as noted here in this thread earlier on. Hereâs the issue:
Any monsters with excessively strong mechanics/movesets that donât require a combo to be effective force a power creep. They do this because they become staple in the meta and put people off investing in a whole new strategy when theyâve got specific monsters that can improve any strategy to make it godly powerful.
Good examples of this are: shockers, tranquilizing entrance (especially Malwing), Magmarinus (super low TU sweeping with stun immunity and tanking), Penguinator and Chromera (roaring entrance in general). These monsters will all be around forever unless they get killed off by a ridiculous number of counters or their movesets nerfed. Itâs nice that they can add so much to every team but it ruins the diversity of the game and downplays so many of the great combos available.
Another issue is with monsters that guarantee more than a 1-for-1 trade. The death revenge mechanic has always been in the game and itâs a great strategy which is balanced very well by hold ground being so commonplace on legendaries. However, recent monsters like Ankoudragon and Tortogeist have potential to cause big problems in the game if there arenât sufficient counters to them. Right now there are just one or two so they are not a winning factor but if their number increases we canât use the excuse âyou can get more value from a combo of monstersâ anymore. So to clarify the issue:
Monsters which give guaranteed MORE THAN 1-for-1 cannot be left without sufficient counters coming at a later date.
So, for the future of Neo Monsters I would suggest:
All stand-alone strong monsters that add excessive amount of value to any team are given restrictions of some sort or enough counters are introduced that their value drops significantly below what combos can achieve (e.g. for shockers, when they enter the field all your teammates have the time until their next turn increased by 40s or stun counter/converter becomes more commonplace on new monsters so a shocker is less valuable as all it adds to a team is the stun, which is no longer helping).
Every monster that focuses on trading at better than 1-for-1 is designed so at a later date it can be countered quite easily with the right tools.
Some new monster combos are designed to rely on specific super epics rather than only legendaries, to make them more accessible and desirable for players who already have great combos with their monsters (e.g. mortar monsters tried this except the SE Botanic was limited and not a core part of the strategy, the mortar legendaries work without it being there. Instead it shouldâve been Botanic being more crucial and able to tank so the combo was only super strong when it was there and once removed the legendaries are just average).
To re-vamp old monsters, new ones are added which create strong combos with them. Doing this can make these older monsters viable without actually âbuffingâ them as it simply creates a combo which can be balanced in power against the other combos (e.g. a monster that changes roulette moves to have a higher chance to hit an opponent, 100%?, or literally works with a specific monster like how Solblaze and Lunartic do - best to do that with a secret skill).
And finally, to do a cost restructure (as I previously detailed) would be a great way to balance everything in a more controlled way than is currently available. Things like the link shadow combo which was created back in January had monster costs set to 16. That had reasonable effect on the use of it but itâs not much more than other combos and there are a large number of monsters which are super strong for just 13 cost.
once summon event is done.
