offline Euzebe Colossus Open Casket
Thursday 05/04/2012, 16:49

Hello all,

After the (chaotic) release of the Standard mode and the first feedbacks, we have taken decisions on several things we want to let your know. We think you will be satisfied with the future improvements we will add first.

• Improvement of the quickbattle system in DTs.

We already made corrections, it seems that the small decks vs big decks problem is far less met. We will keep on working on it until the partition T1/T2 is not a problem any more.

• Penalties on some characters in DTs.

The first 2 points penalties per character are already operational and you can find the list here:
Except for Leader, for the moment there are no penalized Standard characters. It may change, we give ourselves time to analyse DTs.

• DTs divided in two.

Finally we won’t alternate DT’s. We will let you have two DTs at the same time, 1 Standard, 1 Extended. With two different rankings.

• Length of a DT shorten but increase of its frequency.

DTs length will decrease from 1 hour to 45 minutes with a 15 minutes break between each tournament and then you can play again. It means there will be 24 Standard DTs and 24 Extended DTs per day.
To prevent abuses, a limitation of 8 DT credits per day and player will be added (you will receive all other rewards if you play more than 8 DTs).

Survivor Standard and Deathmatch Standard rooms.

They will be open soon, we are working on an update of the flash game.

Questions you may want to ask:

• The number of CR remain at 5. It might change in the future.
• A PM will be sent to you each evening if you made a top 150 during the day so as to inform you if you have won a collector (or not).
• The timer will be reduced from 60 to 50 seconds again.

Have fun

offline Zoidberg1 Legend the courtyard of shadows
Monday 23/04/2012, 19:47


On the collar and Cap idea for minimum and Maximum points scorred per fight, you will need a wide range so that people don't go for the Jackie Vickie etc deck in Extended and use that to bludgeon through a lot of quick games and be at the top of the leader board

offline Zoidberg1 Legend the courtyard of shadows
Monday 23/04/2012, 21:20


I thought I would check your claim about how hard it is to do well in a DT in standard mode, (I've never failed to get into the top 150 when playing the whole hour before) so I put together a decent deck

and for the first time ever finished outside the top 150, I got in 19 fights (I'm disappointed in this as I hoped with the new time format I wouldn't have to wait so long for opponents, but it doesn't seem to make much diffrence) over half of these my opponents drew 16 stars or more (The most was 19 and I faced a couple of 18 star hands) which makes me think that the opponent selector still needs alot of work. But even with decent results against continuously higher stared decks I couldn't get close to my usual positioning.

Please can you look into the deck selector again I can't be that unlucky that my opponents keep drawing their highest star cards to their hands.
Also please can we have something done to take the DT's back to what they were, you face a Caelus Askai, etc every fight we need the points deductions in force to make it more even like it was before

offline DivaDestiny Titan The Infinite Shoeblack
Tuesday 24/04/2012, 09:18

I just started playing in a standard tourney and for some reason all the players I faced were newbies playing with starter characters, Vansaar and such. Sure it was easy to get points- but it didn't really seem fair.

It didn't seem to be a star count issue, since most the decks I faced were much higher in star count. My winrate? I am not really sure how that's counted since I just started playing in tourneys again. Global deck winrate? I was playing low-star Berzerks with Spyke, Lola and lots of commons. Not a "power" deck but not bad either.

How are these factors being calculated?. It seems like there are still some bugs here and unfortunately there are probably lots of players taking advantage of them.

offline scratches1972 Imperator Time Conquers All
Wednesday 25/04/2012, 17:47

After reading many of the same points over and over, let me express a few quick observations, points, and opinions:

1. Many people obviously don't want to feel like the Standard format is being pushed upon them. Reduction of previous prizes in other modes by "transferring" some of them to Standard format rooms is disliked (or worse) by many players (including me). If prizes and opportunities were not lowered in the "old" (now "Extended"smiley formats, then I think there would be less opposition. However…

2. ...UR wants to limit the amount of “free” rewards they give away. UR does not want to increase the number of “free” prizes by giving the previous rewards for both Extended and Standard rooms. The elimination of ELO as a DT qualifying room is clearly ONLY meant to lower the free credits and clintz UR gives away by lowering the number of players in DTs; I see no other rational explanation. The obvious objective is to increase the purchase of credits and increase UR's profits. They are a company trying to boost revenue=pure profit. That’s what companies do.

3. The Standard format is severely "broken" in its current state. If the goals are to increase deck diversity and make new players more competitive (as I believe were among UR’s stated purposes), then so far it is a complete failure. I’ve never played Standard myself. From everything I’ve read, the clan imbalances in competitiveness and the relative variety of options is extreme.

To Be Continued

offline scratches1972 Imperator Time Conquers All
Wednesday 25/04/2012, 17:47

4. Let’s look at a great example of an obvious problem: Let’s evaluate the full power (all cards are younger and eligible for Standard) of the best of Skeelz decks (using all 35 cards) Vortex (all 27 cards allowed) or Berserk (all 26 cards legal too), then compare them to the underpowered Root’s ridiculously limited NINE eligible cards (Yes, really only 9 cards, lol) or La Junta’s measly 12 cards. Who couldn’t see a problem there before the format’s release? Now we need to play this nonsense for a while as a beta to see that the 3 year limitation has killed older clans since their powerful “core” cards are not eligible for Standard.

In summary: Over the last 3 years, the older, bigger clans have only received a few “replacement” (replaces another staple card) and some decent cards, but in “Standard” they have few choices (few eligible cards), lack their clan’s top cards, and have several “non-viable” cards. They have not gotten too many great cards in the past years because their core was already strong because of the older now “non-Standard” cards like Shakra, Ratanah, Yookie, Jeena, Arno, Noodile, Rico, etc. While newer clans have all their cards allowed including their OP “core” cards such as Caelus, Spyke, Elvis, etc. which are now too old to qualify for Standard. The differences in choice and in competitive advantage seem clear.

To Be Continued

offline scratches1972 Imperator Time Conquers All
Wednesday 25/04/2012, 17:48

5. Will the Standard format be changed? Of course, it will. It must undergo tremendous changes to become viable and accomplish either of its stated purposes. Why UR could not see what is so immediately obvious in terms of the vast clan & Leader imbalances, I don’t know. However, the last 3 years criterion for standard cards makes no sense except to drive credit sales and devalue older cards (especially those not good for Extended (or T2) . The clans must be balanced with a number of “equal” choices for the new format to work as advertised.
6. ELO participation is clearly down. It’s only 3 weeks of new data (with plenty of old info), but the numbers are statistically significant. I’ve done enough statistical analyses to see that the steady numbers pre-changes compared to the significantly lower post-change numbers (which so far are trending down each week)[Numbers courtesy of elite’s posts]. The fact that there has been a reduction in ELO play looks to be at least 99% certain. The fact that ELO no longer qualifies will reduce ELO play since during DTs, earning a credit plus clintz while boosting your ELO score was a productive strategy. Now you must choose between them, and some people fight for that credit instead of playing ELO. Whether the overall UR activity had dropped or not, I have no idea.

To Be Continued

offline scratches1972 Imperator Time Conquers All
Wednesday 25/04/2012, 17:48

7. What surprises me is the minimal number of “2 point penalty cards” listed for Extended DTs. From my personal perspective it’s good: I have limited time to play and, for a nice change, I get to use some of my best cards for something worthwhile. I’m not playing enough to know which deck(s) are best, but if I can find more time I may find out. (I did make the top 150 in the few I have tried…decks with Lamar Cr with Eyrik or Tanaereva Cr with Wee Lee, etc. receive no penalties? – certainly okay with me who hasn’t had time to play and try to find something that both works well and is fun.) However the list of 2 point penalty cards needed to be posted more clearly (such as a link/button in the battle window which shows the lists: I really don’t want to see Jackie Cr with: Ambre, Zatman, Nellie, Ruby, Dorian, Maurice, etc. so often.

8. Personally, in DTs I’d like to see gaining 1 point for every “penalty card” that you face; shouldn’t you get a few extra points for facing Jackie and/or Ambre and/or Nellie and/or Zatman (with Ruby, Maurice, Kazayan, etc.) or Lyse Teria Cr with Vickie Cr with Ambre.

To Be Continued

offline scratches1972 Imperator Time Conquers All
Wednesday 25/04/2012, 17:49

9. I hate the idea of pairing players based on either their winrates or the winrates of their deck. If a lesser player gets on a roll, they become more likely to run into strong players and stop his/her run. It fights against that “1 great DT” where somebody finishes “above their head”. It also punishes people who play KO decks and depend on a high winrate to place well. A question: Where will the ratings of every possible deck that qualifies be listed…Nowhere...and even if it were, who would spend the time to even read the massive block of data? It’s going to be hard enough for UR to frequently adjust the deck winrates internally; that’s a lot of work considering every deck that gets played enough to qualify is a large amount of info. Another potential problem: What happens if I lose a bunch of battles before the DT and now have a bad personal winrate, will I tend to start the DT against weaker players with a lower rating in the pairing system?

I leave it to each person to decide what has been fact and what has simply been opinion.

YEA! No “To Be Continued” needed, lol.

offline Zoidberg1 Legend the courtyard of shadows
Thursday 26/04/2012, 00:04


A great summary of the sentiments on the boards and there is little you say that I do not agree with other than the lack of cards with a 2 point penelty, ok so potentially if I could motivate myself to play much at the moment (I am fed up with playing against 18-19 star hands with my T1 deck, the selection system is still broken) then with a large collection I could play a powerful deck and do well in the DT's

The problem again goes to the making it fairer for newer players, they can't compete in Standard as everyone I have played in that room is running decks with cards such as ambre askai caelus Michael and other extreamly expensive over powered and unbalanced cards and there is little chance of getting a good dt spot in that room, in extended it is likely to be just as bad with the old powerhouse decks and all the cards you mentioned running rampent.

I really feel sorry for new players starting now,

We really need several things to happen quickly:

Standard reworked to even out the clans and remove the overpowered expensive cards

Standard seperated from Extended in DT results so that people have a chance of getting to the top in that room

A proper 2 point penelty list to make DT's more balanced

The deck selector sorted out (Its killing the game and really isn't working) in my opininon you should not be able to face someone who has more than 3 stars different in their deck, its really getting dull pulling 9-10 stars against 18-19

offline ghelas Titan E X C A L I B U R
Thursday 26/04/2012, 04:10

I'm going to take this opportunity to... yes, yes, complain about "free stuff."
When I started UR, there were always ways to get credits occasionally -- sometimes more accessible to mobile players, but at least they were there.

I'm gonna go over this point by point, because it's a somewhat complicated idea... Read carefully.

Whereas before, we had videos that awarded a credit for watching them, they now award as little as 4 clintz.

As someone pointed out, the number of clintz in this game is always increasing. Fighting battles, spinning the lottery reels, etc, all generates more clintz. Where do these clintz end up? In the banks of the most seasoned players, because they have the most assets.

Players who have been playing for long time have big stashes of clintz available to them, and little motivation to sell new cards -- unless they sell for an exorbitant price. Changing video credits to video clintz means that the prices of new cards will continue to creep UP.

Players who are new to the game, on the other hand, now have less ability to compete than ever. As prices of new, powerful cards go up, it only ensures that newbies will continue to get crushed by cards they can't afford.

Not only did Standard fail to make the game more new-player-friendly, but the changes that accompany it are threatening to put the last nail in the coffin. I think we all understand what it means for UR if the game suddenly becomes less likely to attract new players.

Answer to this subject

Clint City, night.