4Game

hello gwenters, first of all I want to thank the devs for this brave decision to make this original idea into the game, tho I think like many firsts it's obvously not perfect so I made this post to express my ideas on how to improve it hopefully it will inspire/help making this system better for a better future for the game 🙂

Ok this got bigger than I anticipated so here is a TLDR:

3 suggestions:

• Make voting power not equal for all players AND/OR raise the requirements to vote
• Give changes a cooldown to have a sort of damage control
• Make provision changes/votes more than power votes/changes

So I mainly have 2(3) ideas to improve the council feature, if they are implementable that is:

————————————————————————-

First idea is to make voting power not equal for all players AND/OR raise the requirements to vote. So ideally imo people with better knowledge of the game has more influence on the changes than "new players". There are may reasons for this thinking:

– Higher ranked players have more "visibility" of the whole cards and have more experience with seeing synergies, card potentials, consistency and also experience from previous card changes & their effects.

– The low requirements means any smurf will have as much power as the top 500 players who genuinely want to balance the cards.

– "Influencers" will have bigger power by having more followers that fill the requirements. So if one of them want to troll, meme or just feed their ego with playing the system it's easier.

So for this goal, I like to either give the voting power scaling requirements :

• Low req (current one) for 1* vote,
• Med req (more prestige (3-4?), min rank (10-5?) and more won games) for 2* vote,
• and high req (top 500) for 3* vote)

and btw my idea for the 3* req doesn't even include me so I'm not biased on this regard at least. This also gives ppl more incentive to reach top 500 after CDPR tournaments end.

But since I suspect it wouldn't be easy/possible to make this adjustment, I want at least an increase in requirements to the 2nd tier I mentioned (more prestige (2-3?), min rank (10-5?) and more won games) which would cut many of the lower end voters.

————————————————————————–

My second idea is maybe more complicated, but it's oriented towards damage control. So main idea is to have a cooldown to a card's change, now there are many ideas here so I will list them from ideal to least ideal but lazyiest easier to make (imo ofc):

(*Category = Power+1 (Pw+), Power-1 (Pw-), Provision+1(Pr+), Provision-1(Pr-))

• Give a card a penalty (counter = 2) each time it got changed in a category*, and reduce the counter each cycle it wasn't changed in that category. Each counter reduce the score of the card by X (50) in that category.
  • Example: Brathens got changed by power +1 so it got 2 counters for Pw+ category and next cycle it will have -100 score for Pw+, but can be voted on the other categories with no penalty! Now assuming NG players are smart, they will vote for Pr- instead and they won! now Brathens have counter=2 in Pr- category and counter=1 on Pw+ from last cycle so on next cycle Brathens have score -100 for Pr- and -50 for Pw+, which will make it much easier to vote it back in Pw- or Pr+
• Ban a card from being changed in same category for 2 consecutive cycles, so basically a cooldown. This is more effective on non units as they can only have provisions to buff/nerf, but still better than nothing, and can give more chance for community to reverse a bad change. (looking at Compass *cough*)
• Ban a card from being changed in all categories for 2 consecutive cycles, again cooldown, but this time it's goal is to stop the same "wave" to over buff/nerf a card into oblivion, and hopefully they forget next cycle, and 2 months could be enough to rally more ppl to fight the "wave" and reverse the bad changes. Also, this might make more cards see changes instead of seeing same cards going back and forth in the council.

——————————————————————————–

Last suggestion is not as important to me as the previous ones, but I just wanted to mention it, it's about how 2 of the changes Categories only affect units while the other 2 affect the whole cards AND leaders, so I thought maybe giving players more vote slots for changing provisions will give more balance between cards as opposed to mostly being units cuz they already have half the votes/results for them. Personally I would take a -1 slot on power changes and get +1 slot on provision changes. But I can also see this equilibrium done on the results part so (with current 15 changes per Cat) power changes get -10, and provision changes get +10 so more non unit cards will make it into the council

———————————————————————————

Numbers are not optimal values and can be adjusted obviously as I don't have data to base it on so don't focus on those 🙂

Let me know your thoughts and sorry if post is messy, not used to reddit and tried to format it as best I could. Also sorry if it ended up long to read, tried to explain my thoughts as best I could with my english/communication level