@Zaheen1337 wrote:
...but the more luck you add into a game the harder it is for a skilful player to win.
When games are decided based on luck, then it doesn't matter how good you are. If you're just going to be carried by luck or get creamed by it then how is that satisfying on either part? 😢
I would say that it heavily depends on how the luck element is implemented. If there is no control over the luck element, then yes, it is unsatisfying and skill is reduced as a factor to determine the result. But when there is a good implementation and execution of the gameplay element, then it actually makes skill matter more and the luck element brings dynamism and additional excitement to the game.
A simple example is in the case of a card that will spawn a creature on a random lane. If you set up a board state such that the creature HAS to land in a specific location or a couple of locations that are both convenient, then you have fully mitigated the luck factor, even though at the start there might have been only a 25% chance that any specific result would happen. It takes skill and forethought to sculpt the board in preparation for that moment though. You might not even have the card in hand but if you know there is a high chance that you will get it at some point, then you need to account for it. Taking into account these subtle details are the ones that differentiate the amazing card player from the good ones, and to the inexperienced player it will often just seem like they are getting lucky more often.
I believe the shield meter IS correctly implemented. First consider what it adds to the game.
- A set of blocks through the game that a defender can count on and that the attacker must account for.
- A smooth distribution of the special powers, which are relatively small in effect (usually the equivalent of a 2-4 casting cost card) but due to them being free (or very cheap) and due to the moment at when you can execute them, they can create very interesting interactions and completely turn around a game.
Now, consider just how static they would be if they were completely deterministic. For example, imagine if all hits added exactly the same amount of shield as the damage that is being given or if all added exactly one segment. This would probably make for a more chess like experience that the Spikes (hardcore competitive players) would like, but it would detract from the whimsy that the more casual (and much larger) crowd enjoys from this franchise.
Lastly, think about just how much luck is really involved here. There are 3 shields and each shield takes 3-8 hits to fill up and over the course of a single game they usually average out, making it relatively deterministic.
I'd also like to counter a point that Meegram seems very sure about. He says that players remember the bad things and forget the good things so that gameplay elements like these ones generally only end up creating bad memorable experiences. I beg to differ. While this is true of human nature in general, I believe that the effect of this particular gameplay element is very similar to top decking in MTG where getting that exact card that you needed at that exact moment creates some very memorable game finales. Just look at this video:
https://clips.twitch.tv/fry_em_up/ElatedKuduFunRun
I've had a couple of cases like this, where the game is very tight and I just need that one extra super power and I set up the board to force it and get the exact one I needed. It's exhilirating!
(note that in that video you have a person in ultimate league, having plenty of fun with the game even though they are not gaining any gems for their wins, and using a deck that has a single legendary and 4 super-rare and in fact mostly basic cards, something quite attainable within a few weeks of playing without spending any money at all. This is how the game is meant to be enjoyed.)