Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Bakabridget

How skillful is shadowverse really?

43 posts in this topic

How often when you lose do you legitimately feel it was because your opponent was better than you?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not very.... it comes more down to who gets their win cons first pretty much xD I'll admit some people have been pretty skilful, but that's normally if they pull off some absurd lethal, otherwise it feels more like rng screwing one of us lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

50% deckbuilding, 25% piloting, 25% rng, more or less.

Thus, 75% of the games COULD depend on skill, to me.

...pity that one can netdeck, so you can "cheat" at least 50% of skill, if you want.

In fact, tournaments are usually great to watch. Sure, rng is always a thing, but there you really can tell apart the netdecker from the really skillful players, who usually manage to reach the top 8 or top 16.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What skill? Everyone's just netdecking and whoever goes first wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The game doesn't require much skill from the player when we are talking about fast agro decks or something like DS that even brain dead people can use it as efficient as anyone else, where the game truly require skill imo is when a match continue for a long time & both players have lot's of stuff in the field & also lot's of cards in their hand, the decision each player is going to take when a mach reach this point could very well decide the winner, I have seen lot's of players doing wrong moves when they are under pressure & that ofc cost them the game when they could have won, in situations such as that you can distinguish a really skilled player, but other than those cases most of the time is all about what cards you have in your deck, if you play 1st or 2nd & how lucky you are, I have won lot's of games due to a lucky draw the last second that literally save my a s s :P

Edited by rpgmaniac
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the moment ? Not a lot of the time, the problem with skill is it requires actual interaction and choices. Currently you do not have a lot.

 

Up against ramp dragon ? Hope they don't ramp up going first once or twice. I mean no skill related there and with all the powerplays to quickly clear out any tempo..  Skill won't matter since you can't play anything before turn 4 or 5 that will survive a salamanders' breath and any damage you do can quickly be outdone by Draconic fervor while drawing them a ton of cards until they get whatever big play you can't respond to in most cases. On the other hand if they don't ramp.. well the story is reversed where they don't have choices (mostly then by the design of their own deck) but pretty much nullifies any skill.

 

Similarly vs aggro blood. You go second and they curve out well ? You have extremely few options to actually play against them and thusly. No skill involved because most of your choices won't be viable due to them just being able to lock it down with sheer power

 

And that is currently shadowverse's big problem. In many cases you have no real choices due to how the powercreep has been done.

 

You have a few cards that are just superpowerful with no real.. Bad situations meaning you just play them and you are good to go, there are no real ways you can be punished for them unless you get extremely unlucky. I mean take Enhance at it's worst, there was no counter-play to them, no way to punish an opponent for actually enhancing a card. There was no "If a follower uses enhance, gain +x/+x or destroy said follower.. or deal 5 damage to the enemy leader" or a spell that says "If there is a enhanced follower on board, destroy it and summon X" or even a "If an enhanced effect is used, negate it"

 

Darkness evolved was good because, well they kinda offered counter-plays to evolve, not always the best.. But there were some and several of the other cards were counter-plays. The issue was they didn't offer new plays meaning going second became too good

 

But they seem to now have completely abandoned counter-play.. which means going first is amazingly good especially with all the powercreep added.

 

And that means when you have followers and spells that are just amazingly good at all turns.. and no way to punish them, the actual number of choices and counter choices drops and that means skill drops.

 

I mean when a game can be decided in the first two turns. because things snowball from there or there are just so powerful cards you can't play against after that.. where is the skill then?  And that is the current situation, it's basically like hearthstone around Karazhan. Where it was dominated by extreme aggro.. and Reno decks, two decks that were in each their own way so powerful that it came down to coin tosses and if you didn't get the right side of the coin you lost because you could literally do nothing to stop them.

 

And that is the current situation. So is there skill ? Maybe if you get lucky in the matchup. Otherwise the developers clumsy and one sided design has resulted in a game where skill currently is a rather rare find because there is no counter-play, and few punishes meaning there is little room for skill since skill is dependent on player-interaction which is currently not in a good place.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of the insights being said but hey at least it is more skill based than hearthstone.(played HS for over a year).

Besides who cares if it is CURVEverse of Aggroverse or NetDeckVerse at least we are still enjoying the game right. If I want to be skillful I would rather play chess.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Usually the one complain no skill are the one who go to sv forum and cry 24/7 of the time for a card remove from game or nerf xxx card, usually what they suggest the nerf will going to kill the card completely.

While the one who dun complain are the one who always find solution or ask advice how to handle the situation.

Forget to add the famous quotes, everything use by my opponent required no skill.

Edited by Jason30002

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Archdar said:

 

Besides who cares if it is CURVEverse of Aggroverse or NetDeckVerse at least we are still enjoying the game right. If I want to be skillful I would rather play chess.

No that's the point, people are not enjoying the game hence they are leaving in droves. Skill means player interaction actually matters, if it does not matter what you do in the game, then why are you playing it ? That's the problem, the core problem at the heart of this at the moment. For people to have fun, they need to be able to do things and have those things matter towards actually winning. If it does not matter, why should they play ?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Imperial Dane said:

No that's the point, people are not enjoying the game hence they are leaving in droves. Skill means player interaction actually matters, if it does not matter what you do in the game, then why are you playing it ? That's the problem, the core problem at the heart of this at the moment. For people to have fun, they need to be able to do things and have those things matter towards actually winning. If it does not matter, why should they play ?

 

 

Sorry it appears that my reply is one sided. Only my side. I can see the game has a taint of RNG, curve and lots of aggro. But I still enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turn 5-7 is the most "skillfull" turns you are facing. Every thing else is very basic binar choices. 

Alot of time even deckbuilding is not skilled enough. Fore example, you build awesome interesting thematic deck. Even if you have everything to win, more refined, simple and faster decks will obliterate you.

It's like that neuro-net for quake arena. Program was learning to find the best stratagy in the game. Turn out the best strategy was not to move.

Same here. If you grab all merits of success and ask program to build the best deck. I'm fcn sure it will be the most ***, uninteractive, lowcurve, lowskill aggro deck.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i actually include 'luck' as skill, tons of times......

else, nope. never feel that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skill does exist in small flashes in different portions in the game. Deckbuilding requires skill to make cards work together, but that gets overshadowed by netdecks and Ranked play. The majority of Ranked decks are copycats of each other, not attempting to give that a negative connotation. Now there are some players, for a recent example @rpgmaniac, who spent the time playtesting and changing a deck to tweak it to run better. There is skill in that. @Yue also plays a lot of off-meta decks quite well in Ranked.

When talking about the nitty gritty of playing an actual match, skill depends on your personality and preference. I don't think I would be wrong in saying that Combo decks and Control decks require more skill to pilot than others. Even then most decks do require smart plays to be effective, which is a portion of skill.

Not dismissing rng and luck, which plays a large part, but there is skill involved. Imo.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yeah, I also feel like the game still requires quite a lot of skill. For example, for most decks that I start playing, my winrates are usually around 50%, but as time goes on, almost every single one of the decks that I use increases in win rate due to better mulliganing and evo timing. Both of those elements I feel are often overlooked. With some decks, you may not simply be looking for all low cost cards. If you have one two drop already, you may opt to keep a high cost card also because that certain card is very central to your deck and your deck curve makes it likely you will still be able to play on curve even while keeping that high cost card. Also, knowing when you can afford to not evolve to clear your opponent's board and take risks with your life total is often the difference I find between my wins and losses. Finding the right balance between going Face and trading is also very important. Knowing the reach of your opponent's deck and being able to identify a deck archetype early on by key differing early game cards and adjusting your aggressiveness and conservativeness accordingly are also reliant on experience and skill. I could keep going with these examples forever because there are so many aspects of the game that are skill-based. I just think we as gamers who are prone to being salty due to being invested in this game tend to overreact to the "never lucky" aspects of the game and downplay the actual skill we display throughout a match. While I do agree netdecking does take some of the skill out of the game, I know for sure a powerhouse deck like Midrange Shadow would still lose most of the time to Tier 3 decks if it was piloted by someone lacking skill. The only decks which may be an exception to this are hyper aggressive Face decks but very few have been good as of late. And the only hyper aggressive decks that have existed imo were Face Sword and Dragon and Vania Blood. And having experience with 2 of those 3 decks, I can definitely say even those decks do require skill in the form of knowing your reach damage, and becoming very familiar with your top deck percentages of Lethal outs when you're about to run out of gas. Yes, your top deck is part luck, but capitalizing on whatever line of play puts you in the best position to win the match whether it be evolving an on board follower for that extra push of face damage, or knowing you can afford to clear your opponent's board knowing they have a low chance of clearing your post-evo board with their deck's removal options, is still a display of skill. I'm not trying to invalidate what other's have said about luck feeling like it overshadow's skill at times. Of course I myself even feel that way sometimes. But when I actually get over my salt and take the time to observe my performance, I can tell that experience and fine-tuning my decisions have definitely taken me a long way even from just a few expansions ago.

Edited by Adubs
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Adubs said:

Yeah, I also feel like the game still requires quite a lot of skill. For example, for most decks that I start playing, my winrates are usually around 50%, but as time goes on, almost every single one of the decks that I use increases in win rate due to better mulliganing and evo timing. Both of those elements I feel are often overlooked. With some decks, you may not simply be looking for all low cost cards. If you have one two drop already, you may opt to keep a high cost card also because that certain card is very central to your deck and your deck curve makes it likely you will still be able to play on curve even while keeping that high cost card. Also, knowing when you can afford to not evolve to clear your opponent's board and take risks with your life total is often the difference I find between my wins and losses. Finding the right balance between going Face and trading is also very important. Knowing the reach of your opponent's deck and being able to identify a deck archetype early on by key differing early game cards and adjusting your aggressiveness and conservativeness accordingly are also reliant on experience and skill. I could keep going with these examples forever because there are so many aspects of the game that are skill-based. I just think we as gamers who are prone to being salty due to being invested in this game tend to overreact to the "never lucky" aspects of the game and downplay the actual skill we display throughout a match. While I do agree netdecking does take some of the skill out of the game, I know for sure a powerhouse deck like Midrange Shadow would still lose most of the time to Tier 3 decks if it was piloted by someone lacking skill. The only decks which may be an exception to this are hyper aggressive Face decks but very few have been good as of late. And the only hyper aggressive decks that have existed imo were Face Sword and Dragon and Vania Blood. And having experience with 2 of those 3 decks, I can definitely say even those decks do require skill in the form of knowing your reach damage, and becoming very familiar with your top deck percentages of Lethal outs when you're about to run out of gas. Yes, your top deck is part luck, but capitalizing on whatever line of play puts you in the best position to win the match whether it be evolving an on board follower for that extra push of face damage, or knowing you can afford to clear your opponent's board knowing they have a low chance of clearing your post-evo board with their deck's removal options, is still a display of skill. I'm not trying to invalidate what other's have said about luck feeling like it overshadow's skill at times. Of course I myself even feel that way sometimes. But when I actual get over my salt and take a chance to observe my performance, I can tell that experience and fine-tuning my decisions have definitely taken me a long way even from just a few expansions ago.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a lot of skill in the game, but it's mostly built around playing around the options your opponent has and the state of the game.

Knowing the tools your opponent has to get lethal from the current point of the game lets you make more aggressive plays to push for your own lethal setups. If your opponent has 3 Forest Bats and is going to have 6pp next turn, it's not a bad idea to go face if you are at 9hp since the most damage your opponent can do with one card is 5 off of Imp Lancer, Vampiric Fortress, or Razory Claw. With one more bat, you have to trade because then your opponent gets an easy lethal.

Knowing your opponent's tools to swing the game in their favor helps make better plays so one play from your opponent doesn't cost you the game. Choosing whether or not to play a Vanguard or a Quickblader as a Swordcraft player can be interesting if your board has 4 other followers and the opposing Havencraft player is approaching 6pp. In that same situation, it's not inappropriate to leave a follower up if you aren't afraid of dying against that same opponent, since it would juts die to Themis' Decree anyways.

Knowing how to trade your folllowers can also be significant in many situations. Veight generally isn't the kind of follower you want to trade more than one follower into, but if you have a White Paladin in your hand and an evolution point you can abuse it to your advantage. Same thing with Nightmare Executioner/Thief and overdraw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering the best players often rank high in tournaments consistently shows skill is a large factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fangore said:

Considering the best players often rank high in tournaments consistently shows skill is a large factor.

all of them run middragne shadow xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zzMedVeDzz said:

all of them run middragne shadow xD

And effectively running Mid Shadow requires the skill to pilot it properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's definitely skill involved, imo this game wasn't ever very rng heavy, the only exception now it's going first or second which is the one big "coin flip" of the game but even so it just gives you better/worst odds. And knowing how to play those odds is what makes a skilled player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Bakabridget said:

How often when you lose do you legitimately feel it was because your opponent was better than you?

It's rare that a person will feel that their opponent was better than them. It's human nature to think that you are better than others by default l0l.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, which unfortunately leads to the conclusion often that it is the game, not them.  See it in every competitive game regardless of how balanced.  I'm a god, I never misplay, my opponent is just using some braindead broken deck or card for cheap mindless wins.  Nerf this, nerf that, then I will dominate!  Once the game is finally fair.  However often said person never ends up dominating regardless of what happens, cause they are too pompous/arrogant to learn and get better.  

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, Yue said:

It's rare that a person will feel that their opponent was better than them. It's human nature to think that you are better than others by default l0l.

I never think that opponent was better. I genualy think that i'm made a mistake. Like you can some what predict themises, Bahamuts and other small combos.

I just always belive, that they bluffing and have nothing in hand >_<

Edited by zzMedVeDzz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need a high degree of skill to succeed in Shadowverse. Give a player a great deck who has no skill and they'll lose - every time. I remember watching a presentation Richard Garfield gave on game design and he spoke at length on luck. One of my favourite board games is King of Tokyo, created by Garfield, and the game has a degree of luck due to a dice rolling mechanic, but it's this luck that adds to the enjoyment of King of Tokyo. The difference with Shadowverse is it is a digital card game, with matches designed to last a few minutes and when that luck aspect doesn't go a player's way, they can feel salty. If you were playing this game in a physical form, dealing actual cards and sitting down in front of a friend, the luck would add to it's enjoyment. One point I'm trying to make is: luck can be enjoyable. It also depends on your perspective at the time. I find if I'm not in a good head space the RNG gets to me but when I'm in a good mood, the RNG has me go, "That's life," and laugh it off. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the vast majority of my losses there could've been an alternate line of play that either wins me the game, or at least prolongs it, even if that line was theoretically worse in terms of probability. Hence, I think that piloting any deck requires skill, despite the aggro hate circlejerk.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0