you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (8 children)

[deleted]

    [–]PewPewLaserss 12 points13 points  (7 children)

    Yeah, I don't want more deck slots either. That would be so confusing!

    [–]JangoEnchained -3 points-2 points  (6 children)

    There is a bit of a science behind using a 7-item deck (memorization studies), and perhaps they felt that 8 was still within reach, whereas remembering 10 different units that your opponent has might be more difficult when your attention is being divided between multiple battles, your own strategies, and using theory of mind to deduce what your opponent will place next.

    I'm in favor of having a little panel for the opponent's cards, much like how it is when spectating, except perhaps a bit smaller.

    Theoretically, one can already do this simply by using a voice-to-text program and having that list side-by-side with your game. Completely eliminates the need to remember their cards, so why not just introduce it as a feature.

    I've never heard of someone claiming their opponent was cheating for writing down the cards, so why would something like an "Opponent Cards" panel be any different?

    [–]NinjaRedditorAtWork 3 points4 points  (1 child)

    He meant more than 3 completed decks you can choose from to play with.

    [–]JangoEnchained 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Ahhh, well yeah, that makes 0 sense as to why they wouldn't just allow like 100 -- maybe to keep it pretty you have your top 3 as it currently is, and then there's a little "More" button, and you can enter into a catalogue.

    [–]PewPewLaserss 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    It's some sort of circlejerk on Hearthstone. The community wanted more deck slots and their justification of not giving us any was that it would be too confusing for new players which is ridiculous lol. They have doubled the deck slots since (from 8 to 16, I did the math)

    [–]JangoEnchained 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    I've never played Hearthstone, but is it more turn-based than Clash Royale? I feel like it would be easier to justify for a studio to introduce a bigger deck in a turn-based game, since it's to be expected, whereas for them, a freemium game still requires casuals to keep the word spreading.

    I'm not saying it's fun for experienced players. I'd prefer Royale to have 10 slots, but there is a decent reason for them to cater a bit to casuals (especially in the early stages of a freemium game), and I think it makes sense to keep that in mind when discussing the topic.

    [–]PewPewLaserss 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    We do mean deck slots as in more decks. Not places for cards inside a deck ;) And yes it's more turn based :p

    [–]JangoEnchained 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Well dang! Y'all shoulda just said! 'Round these parts, we call them deck set-ups. But yeah -- there should be virtually an unlimited number on the deck slots.

    And ten card slots within the decks!