I understand your attack value only determines the "probability" of winning a battle, but should a low power character with minimal pillz really be able to win against a higher power character with more pillz played? and yes i understand that there are bonuses and abilties that can reasonably lead to this result and thats okay, but when there are no bonuses or abilities a 40 attack should beat a 10 consistently, hell all the time. it doesnt though and thats retarded. are people cheating somehow? what gives?
Well there is definately a formula to how strong a card is besides the attack and power structures that we know about because it seems the java clients initialize deck feature accurately tells you who is the strongest in your deck.
I have chosen my deck this way to see some apparently wimpy cards.
Like Level 1 Copper would always come up. But spec wise at lvl he sucks. The computer knew things about this card that I didn't/ Stuff like he always seems to defy the math.
I don't think it's the computer's math that is wrong -- but rather it's our (the players) concept of how the math is calculated that is a bit ajar. I think this is on purpose to keep that "random" aspect in place.
To me it's more annoying then fun. I collect the cards and set my strategy. I don't want to factor in "and if the system feels like helping" into my strategy.
The Urban Rivals team is made by lovers of all kind of Collectibles Cards Games and Trading Cards Games like: Magic the Gathering, Dominion, Vampire, Yu-Gi-Oh!, Pokemon, Wakfu TCG, Assassin Creed Recollection, Shadow Era, Kard Kombat and Might & Magic Duel of Champions.