Welcome to the Wizard101 Message Boards


Player Guide
Fansites
News
Game Updates
Help

By posting on the Wizard101 Message Boards you agree to the Code of Conduct.

Is it time for a PvP Reform/Touch-Up?

AuthorMessage
Survivor
Dec 18, 2008
2
Hey there everyone!

I was pondering the system of PvP and how it works a few days ago and thought to myself, what if Kingsisle spiced it up a bit? I mean, considering that we've had the same 1v1-4v4 style for quite a bit now. Sure, the game mechanics are alright as they are now, but sometimes a new way to play can make it more interesting.

First Notion: Changing the round-the-circle mechanic.

-I think it’s common sense that whoever goes first has an advantage, especially in PvP. What if each player was chosen randomly in a turn? That way, you never know who will go first, and each round is made very unpredictable. This could be good considering matches are generally won by those who go first since the latter is always one step behind. In a battle that is random and jumps around from player to player, you never know when you have to play offence or defense. Once could argue that it ruins the strategy of the game, however, it would make it more interesting.The strategies we would see here would be more intricate and make the battles less redundant. (As an alternative, maybe we could keep the old round-the-circle mechanic as a separate PvP type?)

Second Notion: New Battle Formations

- 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 have been the general PvP match setups for quite a bit. Sure, they are fun and interesting, but what if we added a couple new ones? There could be Every-Man-for-Himself style matches and even more, and they could work depending on how the match is customized. The customization part for an every-man-for-himself match would probably include banning global attack spells since players would probably get utterly destroyed.

Third Notion: Customizability of Matches

-Sometimes I enter a match and say to myself, “Wow, I love this arena!” or “Darn, not this one”. It would be nice to be able to choose what arena you end up in. Also, there are a few other things. What if you could limit the match in certain ways to make it more interesting? For example; No treasure cards, no charms, no wards, no spells over five pips, etc. This would change the strategy of the matches and even make them more fun to play. Certain matches like this however may require “deck building” times for like one minute or so in order to prepare for a match with certain limitations.

Ultimately, it shouldn't be a bad thing to consider changing the way the game is played. We should really consider a change because it would make the game for fun and even more interesting. A mechanic that is less redundant can keep players on their toes, and every battle would be completely different. The game could use a few touch-ups here and there. As a whole, a few new additions to PvP would be a great thing, since that’s the only way to keep players occupied between major updates.

We must ask ourselves: if the whole spiral is full of infinite possibilities, why not PvP?

Any comments or ideas? Should there be more possibilities in PvP?

Delver
Jun 26, 2009
267
Attention Lead Developer
  • Listen to this guy!!!
  • In fact, put him on your payroll.

Alas, someone who knows CCG's. Great ideas.

Survivor
Jun 24, 2009
1
I was thinking that they use the four quadrants of the circle. The top, left, bottom, and the right. The every man for himself will work excellent for it. Besides the person that goes first would be at random. Perfect new game mode right thier. Richard StrongBlade level 100

Explorer
Nov 21, 2013
78
Your first idea wouldn't work in PvP. That "randomized", presumably 50/50 system will likely result in one Wizard having two turns in a row.

Delver
Jan 31, 2012
226
I disagree with him though.

It will only make me sad if it goes randomly

The old way is more fair I vote to keep it the old way other wise you can't use your best spells

In rank pvp if they make it this way they better still have the old 1.

If they don't I'm not doing rank pvp till it goes back.

Amy lvl 96 Loves rank pvp that is the old ways so if you create the new 1 keep the old 1 also other wise it not really fair.

Delver
Jun 26, 2009
267
First, My apologizes Tess for calling you "this guy".

@Matthew Raven - You are correct. There is the possibility that a player can go two turns in a row. Possibly even three or more. However the system can work regardless. In fact there are other card based MMO's that have turns randomized.

Explorer
Nov 21, 2013
78
Mr Talon on May 1, 2014 wrote:
First, My apologizes Tess for calling you "this guy".

@Matthew Raven - You are correct. There is the possibility that a player can go two turns in a row. Possibly even three or more. However the system can work regardless. In fact there are other card based MMO's that have turns randomized.
I don't see how a Wizard could have more than two turns in a row because there has to be an intermission (pip giving and card selection) between rounds. For example, under the opening poster's proposed system, Wizard A goes first and Wizard B goes second. At the end of the round, pips are given and a random Wizard is then selected to go first. Wizard B is selected which results in a pattern of: A,B,B,A and so on. I don't think a system like this would benefit PvP remotely. If implemented, it would be just as much luck-based as the current system. I acknowledge that going second is a disadvantage, but I don't believe it should be weighted as heavily as many people make it seem. Sure, the person going first will mathematically always win if you want to break this game down to that extent and run simulations through a computer thousands of times. However, such testing requires you to exclude a Wizard's school, skill, deck construction, fizzles, and many other random variables and statistics. I'm convinced that the better dueler will almost always win from first or second.

Survivor
Dec 18, 2008
2
Matthew Raven 55 on Apr 30, 2014 wrote:
Your first idea wouldn't work in PvP. That "randomized", presumably 50/50 system will likely result in one Wizard having two turns in a row.
I can see how that would be an issue.

Perhaps 1v1 would be unchanged. Recently, I noticed the player(s) that went second in a battle were given an extra pip. This could possibly be used in 1v1 situations, especially since a wizard that gets his/her turn two times or more in a row would definitely have an upper hand.

However, the wizard may never know when they will have their turn. Since they (presumably) cannot see into the future, I assume they could not use it to their advantage.

Defender
May 29, 2013
105
Tess Dragonblade on Apr 27, 2014 wrote:
Hey there everyone!

I was pondering the system of PvP and how it works a few days ago and thought to myself, what if Kingsisle spiced it up a bit? I mean, considering that we've had the same 1v1-4v4 style for quite a bit now. Sure, the game mechanics are alright as they are now, but sometimes a new way to play can make it more interesting.

First Notion: Changing the round-the-circle mechanic.

-I think it’s common sense that whoever goes first has an advantage, especially in PvP. What if each player was chosen randomly in a turn? That way, you never know who will go first, and each round is made very unpredictable. This could be good considering matches are generally won by those who go first since the latter is always one step behind. In a battle that is random and jumps around from player to player, you never know when you have to play offence or defense. Once could argue that it ruins the strategy of the game, however, it would make it more interesting.The strategies we would see here would be more intricate and make the battles less redundant. (As an alternative, maybe we could keep the old round-the-circle mechanic as a separate PvP type?)

Second Notion: New Battle Formations

- 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 have been the general PvP match setups for quite a bit. Sure, they are fun and interesting, but what if we added a couple new ones? There could be Every-Man-for-Himself style matches and even more, and they could work depending on how the match is customized. The customization part for an every-man-for-himself match would probably include banning global attack spells since players would probably get utterly destroyed.

Third Notion: Customizability of Matches

-Sometimes I enter a match and say to myself, “Wow, I love this arena!” or “Darn, not this one”. It would be nice to be able to choose what arena you end up in. Also, there are a few other things. What if you could limit the match in certain ways to make it more interesting? For example; No treasure cards, no charms, no wards, no spells over five pips, etc. This would change the strategy of the matches and even make them more fun to play. Certain matches like this however may require “deck building” times for like one minute or so in order to prepare for a match with certain limitations.

Ultimately, it shouldn't be a bad thing to consider changing the way the game is played. We should really consider a change because it would make the game for fun and even more interesting. A mechanic that is less redundant can keep players on their toes, and every battle would be completely different. The game could use a few touch-ups here and there. As a whole, a few new additions to PvP would be a great thing, since that’s the only way to keep players occupied between major updates.

We must ask ourselves: if the whole spiral is full of infinite possibilities, why not PvP?

Any comments or ideas? Should there be more possibilities in PvP?
  1. I don't agree with the 1st one, as it could lead 1 player to having double turns if they go second, then turn around and go 1st. There's just no disputing that.
  2. I do like the idea of multi-man Free For All, though I have no idea how this would work with more than 4 players
  3. I agree with the last one too.

I actually made a post questioning the possibility of adding Quick and Classic matches to the Practice PvP roster, since they're already formats in tournaments

However, my thing is that those ideas (Just like Quick and Classic matches) would have to be practice only or a tournament thing, as it would destroy ranked

Defender
Dec 16, 2009
164
i agree pvp needs to be revamped but i think KI still needs to balance pvp before they go making more game modes