Ludia Forums

Allowing sequences in battles to go back and forth

Regardless of players on the board is WRONG and creates imbalances that shouldn’t exist.

Nowhere other in this game do turns pass evenly back and forth!

That’s a big issue creating the imbalance in battles.

Every aspect of this game is different. In PVP it happens to be a constant A-B-A-B pattern. You learn to play around it instead of just complaining that one mode of the game isn’t easy for you.

Battle mode can be frustrating. However, I do not see a functional alternative for initiative. I would rather trade initiative back and forth (the way it currently works) than have one player have initiative for multiple heroes. This would certainly unbalance battles further.

And it’s nothing to do with initiative.

The order of attack would be defined by initiative unless I am mistaken.

Yes, but then each character would be allowed to attack, like in challenges, like in D&D, unlike in battles, which creates an imbalance.

So your idea of balance would be a situation where a player could have all four of their characters go before their opponent gets a chance? “cause that’s how it works in D&D”??

You need to go into battle prepared to play around the A-B-A-B pattern, or have equipment and strategy to deal with Revive, Dominate, Poison, etc.

Use Push, Dominate, Stun, Immobile, or just Kill shot the Cleric before he can proc his Revive.
Or even hold the middle ground and stall him so he dies to the Fire’s HP- effect.

Don’t complain about the problem, find a solution instead.

1 Like

I think the issue is that while each player should, at the start, go turn for turn that after a Death it should not. I agree with this aswell so you have A1,B1,A2,B2,A3,B3,A4,B4 as the start sequence…but it should stay the same as opponents are knocked out. E.g. B3 and B2 are knocked out it would go A1,B1,A3,A4,B4.While this has been argued since the introduction of pvp if implemented would change everything.

2 Likes

That suggestion would all but guarantee that whoever gets the first early kill would gain big advantage, and if they ever had 4 vs 2 left, they would be getting twice as many attacks as their opponent, stretching their lead even further.

The A-B-A-B system isn’t the best, but it’s the best we have that guarantees each player gets an equal number of turns.
Anything else would lead to more imbalance and unplayable games.

1 Like

Absolutely correct Pryloc.

You are correct @MisterCinephile.

This was recently discussed in another thread, The current sequencing was established after internal testing by Ludians revealed precisely what you have surmised.

Additionally, if a certain forum enthusiast would desist from daily re-creation of existing threads there might be less confusion regarding the purpose of the thread.

2 Likes

I am assuming the reason for the post is frustration. In the current system it can be painful to knock out 3 of your opponents only to have the 4th slaughter your team. If I get my opponent behind the fire line I will purposely leave some characters alive and let some of mine die. For example I recently replaced my lvl18 Cleric with my lvl 11 monk…once I have used his 1 shot kill up he is dead weight. I am literally better off without him. It is a silly system, but it probably is the one that creates the least amount of complaints …

2 Likes

Orloch, I love you too :grin:

Aint that the truth🙂

If frustration is losing to a less competent player due to computer matchups, then yes.

On paper what should be and could be done in battle is fantastic. Engineers often design things that when put into practice, epic failures.

Players that talk about, explaining what one could do or should do in battle…that nonsense and lack of reality is much more frustrating.

Not to mention they’re most definently inept in battle and success come by way of regular in game purchases.

The ABABAB pattern is something that makes no sense when applying it to real life or average games. however for this game it does make sense. if you thought games were unbalanced the few times you lost a 4v1 match wait till you start not having alternating turns. Whoever gets first kill would have such an advantage that they would probably win the majority of battles. There is way to much burst dps in this game to have games not be ABABAB. If the matches were less burst dps and more drawn out the other system might make more sense, but with most characters dying in 1-2 rounds of attacks doing anything other than ABABAB just doesnt work…all that said most people complain about this and specifically mention the cleric, this argument of attack rounds would be a lot less complained about if they just made the cleric rez stick max out at 1-2 rezes per character.

2 Likes