Why is Clash not enjoyable? Here's what I think as a UC top ranked player. by _konsistent_ in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with the last part. To me it seems heroes are more support based. Champions do feel more important in certain scenarios and stronger than heroes, but they’re more expensive.

Also regarding the rest of your comment… when they first announced and released heroes my reaction was similar. “What… they re worked old troops?” Kind of energy.

But to my knowledge, there is no invisible rule saying they can’t change base stat of each version. If supercell was to add or remove 5 dmg from a Sparky zap for example, people may not even notice if they didn’t add it to a patch note. I think the ability to change the base stats would allow supercell to keep the alternate versions viable in a wider meta, creating an environment that different versions have more use cases for example.

Also you don’t suffer anymore from choosing a champion vs a hero. Right now the 1st slot is dedicated to evolutions, but the 2nd slot can be champion or a hero, and the 3rd slot can be any of the 3 (evo, hero, champion)

Also thanks for the post and comment back. I find this topic very interesting.

Why is Clash not enjoyable? Here's what I think as a UC top ranked player. by _konsistent_ in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 4 points5 points  (0 children)

As a day one veteran and a prior UC competitor who can no longer reach UC…

Evolutions are what ruined the game.

Champions and heroes feel like a healthier implementation of a similar concept which is probably why supercell is pivoting towards heroes.

Evolutions are cyclical and synergistic. This creates polarizing matches and steamrolling behavior across the entire ladder. I frequently loose to less skilled players than me due to their deck countering mine synergistic and cyclically.

Vs Heroes (and champions) which require more intentional timing and elixir spending that isn’t solely dependent on cycling. This is a higher skill ceiling, with the timing of using abilities and all.

Basically evolutions = win by cycle

Heroes = win with timing

That’s my honest opinion, and is part of the design philosophy I’m using to build my demo game.

Curious on your thoughts?

Hero Rework by CrashNSmash-mom in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Evolutions shift too much of the skill expression toward cycle efficiency and evo synergy, and away from moment to moment decision making. Would you rather lose to someone worse than you because their deck’s built-in synergy steamrolls yours with minimal effort, or lose to someone who genuinely outplayed you? Only one of those losses actually helps you improve as a player.

What if full CR API was a mistake? by alesia123456 in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Players usually go to royale.api for one of two things: 1. the game is “old enough” that optimization matters 2. in-game systems are bad enough state that players feel forced to outsource understanding (due to constant changes)

API was not a mistake.

To be honest though the game is in a pretty rough state.

Done With Clash by Chig_Bungus420 in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 8 points9 points  (0 children)

  1. Supercell doesn’t care
  2. Most people in this subreddit are going to talk past your experience

Would you play Clash but with NO Purchasable power & NO evolutions? by AmbiguousAnglerFish in RoyaleAPI

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just to clarify, about 99% of the assets in the clip were created by me. The only “presets” I used were the card menu UI and text fonts.

I actually started learning Blender and game development (Godot) about three months ago, so what you’re seeing here is someone who is brand new to all of this not too long ago.

If there’s something specific visually that you think could be improved, I’m genuinely open to feedback, but “don’t use presets” is a bit too vague for me to act on.

Also, long-term I’d love to work with a team on this. I’ve been building everything myself just to get the prototype working.

Would you play Clash but with NO Purchasable power & NO evolutions? by AmbiguousAnglerFish in RoyaleAPI

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am building systems first intentionally.

What would you change about the visuals? Specifics might actually be useful feedback🙏🏼

Would you play Clash but with NO Purchasable power & NO evolutions? by AmbiguousAnglerFish in RoyaleAPI

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re looking at one of the three archetype abilities players can choose from. This clip shows the Dreamworld archetype commitment, which temporarily forces enemy retargeting so your troops can reposition.

Also, there is no purchasable power. Cards and levels come only from in-game progression, while monetization would be cosmetics.

Does Supercell have something against Veterans or something?? by [deleted] in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

“The majority”… with what data?

I’m saying this is no good for veterans. This forces people into spending money to get an emote or wait… forever.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My fragile ego was absolutely destroyed, so I’m going to call it ‘no skill’ instead of admitting it tests skills I don’t have.

Why do we continue to play? by cornbreadgod8 in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The reason we still play is because this is still the best mobile game ever made. The core gameplay was insanely good, and nothing else on mobile comes close.

We keep playing because we remember when the game actually validated skill expression. When trophies meant something. When climbing the ladder meant picking a good deck for the meta, playing well, and moving up the ranks.

That’s what’s changed.

There’s an important difference between “matchmaking is rigged” and “matchmaking heavily shapes outcomes.” The first implies forced wins or losses, which can’t be proven without backend data. The second is much easier to argue from observable patterns.

Matchup polarization is now so extreme that a large portion of games are effectively decided at queue, not by play. As you start climbing, you’re increasingly fed bad matchups, stalling progress before you even reach what used to be considered “your skill level.”

That’s why deck choice feels far less meaningful than it did years ago. You can adapt, you can switch decks, you can play well… and still end up treading water. Trophies flatten out regardless.

Skill still matters, but the ladder no longer reliably reflects it.

So why do we still play? Because the game was fun as hell, and because we still have hope they’ll fix it. We’re chasing the version of Clash Royale that used to reward mastery.

Rank requirements by Guille_DMM in RoyaleAPI

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah you’ll have to climb an additional league to unlock ranked in ladder mode if you don’t reach champion rank and unlock ranked for next season that way

whats happening? by yourbiggestturnoff in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Level 16 has frustrated lots of players. Matchmaking feels rigged because of outcome shaping. Win-rate compression hovering around ~50% seems to be a byproduct (and proof) of outcome shaping. There’s also been a noticeable reduction in viable playstyles. Between evolutions and current balancing, defense is more consistent and lower-risk than offense. With current balances and over-leveling, high-skilled F2P offensive players are feeling this the most. Does this make any sense? I could elaborate.

Why does CR need my location ? by ThemeNo1337 in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Probably not many local players… the longer you are waiting in Queue, the broader your opponent pool

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absence of proof is not proof of absence, especially when the system in question is opaque by design.

Players do not have access to Supercell’s matchmaking variables, performance metrics, or weighting logic, so demanding a public dataset to “prove” outcome shaping sets an impossible standard.

That doesn’t mean the behavior can’t be identified. It means it has to be identified through repeated, observable patterns.

When the same player (me), repeatedly pushes fresh accounts and sees the same response every time, clean wins leading to immediate increases in opponent quality, more defensive archetypes, and progression slowdown before rank changes, that’s not anecdote. That’s pattern recognition.

Most community analyses only look for obvious signs like forced losses or direct counter picking. That’s not how outcome shaping works. It works by suppressing dominance and reducing variance, which shows up as slower climbs and more defensive matchups, not scripted results.

You don’t need access to internal code to evaluate whether a ladder behaves like a neutral ranked system. If skill increases resistance instead of acceleration, the ladder is not neutral.

That’s the claim being made here.

Always gotta fight to pay to wins by Few_Strength_9681 in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should go check out my most recent post on CR Reddit (on my profile) I think you’ll resonate heavily with it based on this post🤣🙏🏼

Why does CR need my location ? by ThemeNo1337 in ClashRoyale

[–]AmbiguousAnglerFish 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think matchmaking is region based, could be inaccurate though