My point was that you will lose more than you win ... not that you can't climb at all.
Nobody denies that.
My point is that as long as you don't have all the cards, you are forced to think for yourself how to replace them in the metadecks, based on what is in your collection. And the collections are different for everyone - that's the beauty, so primitive netdeking is impossible. Moreover, the collections are different for everyone not only throughout the entire third pool, but even after it, given how difficult it is to get cards from pool 4 and 5. Yes, at that point, there is already little diversity in the collections, but still. There are no such conditions in Hearthstone, or in Legends of Runeterra, or in Gwent, God rest his soul.
There are no such conditions in Hearthstone, or in Legends of Runeterra, or in Gwent, God rest his soul.
You are severely underestimating how long it takes to compile a full collection in Hearthstone, or even to build a specific deck on purpose. [EDIT - many people in HS, especially F2P players, have to build homebrew versions of meta decks because they dont have and cannot get all the cards, just like happens in Snap. The only difference is that Snap NEVER allows you to target a specific card you want, EVER.]
And of course, you are free to have your own preferences of what you want to do in a card game. Apparently you really enjoy a sense of accomplishment from collecting things that are hard to get.
In contrast, most people want to actually play the game with whatever cards they want to use at a given moment. Legends of Runeterra is perfect for that, since you can always target specific cards you want to get, and then you can build a deck with them and actually play it. And by the way, I have to call you out for your comment on LoR being so absurdly easy to get cards. Yes, it's very generous. But even with their generosity, it would still take the better part of a year to have a fully complete collection in LoR, as a F2P player. There are a TON of cards to collect. (When I started it took me about 9 months to fully complete my collection ... and there are a lot more cards now than when I started.)
And the collections are different for everyone - that's the beauty, so primitive netdeking is impossible. Moreover, the collections are different for everyone not only throughout the entire third pool, but even after it, given how difficult it is to get cards from pool 4 and 5.
There are a couple things going on this quote that are misunderstandings.
1) Literally everyone who hits collection level 486 has EXACTLY the same collection at that moment. Every single player, no exceptions. There is zero difference in their cards, just in their variants. Same thing for collection level 222 - every player at collection level 222 has identical collections with every other player at collection level 222.
2) Everyone in pool 3 has all of the pool 1 and pool 2 cards, guaranteed, no exceptions. This means that the only remaining variable is which cards your deck has that are exclusive to pool 3 or higher. This certainly allows for variations, but every deck will still contain a significant number of cards from pools 1 and 2.
3) Pools 4 and 5 are not actually separate pools. The only reason they are mentioned is because they have a different drop chance than pool 3. But you could theoretically get a "pool 5" card immediately after moving into pool 3 - anytime after collection level 486. You don't "move out" of pool 3 at any point, though I suppose you could say you're no longer in pool 3 if you manage to collect every single pool 3 card. But there is no collection level where you move from pool 3 to pool 4.
And the collections are different for everyone - that's the beauty, so primitive netdeking is impossible. Moreover, the collections are different for everyone not only throughout the entire third pool, but even after it, given how difficult it is to get cards from pool 4 and 5.
There are a couple things going on this quote that are misunderstandings.
1) Literally everyone who hits collection level 486 has EXACTLY the same collection at that moment. Every single player, no exceptions. There is zero difference in their cards, just in their variants. Same thing for collection level 222 - every player at collection level 222 has identical collections with every other player at collection level 222.
2) Everyone in pool 3 has all of the pool 1 and pool 2 cards, guaranteed, no exceptions. This means that the only remaining variable is which cards your deck has that are exclusive to pool 3 or higher. This certainly allows for variations, but every deck will still contain a significant number of cards from pools 1 and 2.
3) Pools 4 and 5 are not actually separate pools. The only reason they are mentioned is because they have a different drop chance than pool 3. But you could theoretically get a "pool 5" card immediately after moving into pool 3 - anytime after collection level 486. You don't "move out" of pool 3 at any point, though I suppose you could say you're no longer in pool 3 if you manage to collect every single pool 3 card. But there is no collection where you move from pool 3 to pool 4.
Okay...
1) 222 and 486. I mean, c'mon... Unless you want to stay a while at these CL, it's just two very short moments in time. That one core card of the meta deck might be the last card in your collection tree in that pool. Or two cards. Or three cards. So you play the whole pool 1 or 2 period with the substitutions you should think of.
2) The period you were saying lasts from 486 to 600. Not that long also. After 600 in pool 3 your opponents will be mostly with full meta decks. And pool 3 cards change the gameplay significantly. It's not fair to say that your deck will still consists of pool 1 and 2 cards. It will be a completely new game for you depending of what few pool 3 cards you will have. And you will think how to accompany them with cards you have in a best possible way. And this period lasts for a several months, until you have all the pool 3 cards.
3) And after that you will have probably 3-5 random cards from pools 4 and 5 and you start post-pool 3 period (doesn't matter how you name this period, I name it pool 4-5, why not, makes sense, you have all the pool 3 cards by now, now you get only 4's and 5's) with that and this period will last even longer than the previous one, I will say that it will last probably forever for 99% of the player base, because it is very hard to have all the cards from current pool 5 in any period of time.
Last two things. The difference is that Snap never allows you to target a specific card you want (well now it kinda allows, partially) is a very big difference. Being able to fully craft in other games a good meta-deck (you could craft good aggro deck pretty fast in any game) is a fundamental difference. It's not just "only" difference. And the second one, I wouldn't say anything about "most people" at all. It's still one person who expresses this point of view.
Ok. So, first we should establish that in NO CARD GAME should you expect to be favored in every single game you play. Variance - which cards you draw, which cards your opponent draws, which counter/tech cards you run (yes, tech cards do exist in other card games!) etc., will always have an impact on how the game plays out.
Secondly, let's talk about Snapping. Unlike Hearthstone (and most other CCGs with a ladder), in Snap, a player can make their wins count way more than their losses by knowing when they have the advantage and when they've been beat. No, you're not going to have a 75% winrate, no matter what deck you play - this is true of every card game (unless you're a Youtuber and you play four games with a deck). However, you can climb like you have a 75% winrate by retreating before you lose more than 2 cubes and snapping when you have a good chance of winning the game to increase your payout.
I also don't understand the argument that "homebrew" lists don't work in Snap because "everyone else" is running "top tier meta decks," especially when another argument being made against Snap is the lack of targeted card acquisition. How does everyone else have access to top tier meta decks if they also can't target every card they need for those decks?
Snap is NOT a perfect game, and if it's not the game for you THAT IS TOTALLY FINE. There are plenty of other games out there that can and will be your cup of tea. Don't act like a game is universally bad because you personally don't enjoy playing it, instead you should find a game you do enjoy playing.
In the end, I see this entire thread as a convincing argument that Snap is actually pretty decent, considering that one person is arguing that Snap is bad because it lacks reactive plays and another is arguing that Snap is bad because every deck you could play has an easy counter to it that any deck can run. Penalties offset, replay first post.
And you will think how to accompany them with cards you have in a best possible way. And this period lasts for a several months, until you have all the pool 3 cards.
I agree, it would take several months of steady playing to collect the entire pool 3.
Just to remind you, your claim here has consistently been that Marvel Snap is better than LoR, because it's harder to get all the cards.
Now, to repeat my previous comment: it takes a full year of steady playing to collect complete sets of all of the cards in LoR.
Last I checked, a year is longer than a few months.
Edit - I should clarify that I don't think Snap is actually bad - it's mediocre at best, but with some cool new ideas. What I do think is that it's highly deceptive at the beginning - the player experience through pools 1 and 2 are not even remotely similar to the experience after entering pool 3. Which brings me to the crux of my issue with Snap - it's not nearly as good as the hype makes it out to be, and it definitely did not deserve to win game of the year. If the entire game experience was similar to the pool 1 and 2 experience, the game would be flat-out amazing. But pool 3+ completely ruins it for me. It's like they did a giant bait-and-switch.
And you will think how to accompany them with cards you have in a best possible way. And this period lasts for a several months, until you have all the pool 3 cards.
I agree, it would take several months of steady playing to collect the entire pool 3.
Just to remind you, your claim here has consistently been that Marvel Snap is better than LoR, because it's harder to get all the cards.
Now, to repeat my previous comment: it takes a full year of steady playing to collect complete sets of all of the cards in LoR.
Last I checked, a year is longer than a few months.
Edit - I should clarify that I don't think Snap is actually bad - it's mediocre at best, but with some cool new ideas. What I do think is that it's highly deceptive at the beginning - the player experience through pools 1 and 2 are not even remotely similar to the experience after entering pool 3. Which brings me to the crux of my issue with Snap - it's not nearly as good as the hype makes it out to be, and it definitely did not deserve to win game of the year. If the entire game experience was similar to the pool 1 and 2 experience, the game would be flat-out amazing. But pool 3+ completely ruins it for me. It's like they did a giant bait-and-switch.
I'm glad it made game of the year over any blizzard game. The lesser evil. Like in politics. Lo
Secondly, let's talk about Snapping. Unlike Hearthstone (and most other CCGs with a ladder), in Snap, a player can make their wins count way more than their losses by knowing when they have the advantage and when they've been beat. No, you're not going to have a 75% winrate, no matter what deck you play - this is true of every card game (unless you're a Youtuber and you play four games with a deck). However, you can climb like you have a 75% winrate by retreating before you lose more than 2 cubes and snapping when you have a good chance of winning the game to increase your payout.
I am well aware of how snapping works. My final collection level before uninstalling the game was around 2700-2800.
Defenders of the game keep talking about snapping and how you need to do it properly. But here's the thing - let's assume everyone in the game learns how to snap properly (and based on your comments and those from other people, that shouldn't take all that long, so it's a completely reasonable assumption). What happens at that point?
Scenario 1 - you're in a losing position, so you retreat. Your opponent gets 1 lousy cube. Yay for them sort of? No big loss for you.
Scenario 2 - you're in a winning position, so your opponent retreats. You get 1 lousy cube. Yay? Not really.
Scenario 3 - it's unclear who is winning, or you expect a surprise, but you think you have a chance. You don't snap, and your opponent doesn't either (because they are thinking the same as you are, since they also understand snapping). The game ends and someone gets 2 cubes. Clearly better than 1, but still not that exciting.
Scenario 4 - one of you is confident of winning and snaps. At this point, if the snapper was playing correctly (which we already assumed they are), they will win this game. That means the one who didn't snap will retreat. Snapper gets only 1 cube.
There are several other variations, but I think the point is quite clear by now - if everyone snaps properly, no one ever gets or loses more than 2 cubes, and they generally only get or lose 1.
And you will think how to accompany them with cards you have in a best possible way. And this period lasts for a several months, until you have all the pool 3 cards.
I agree, it would take several months of steady playing to collect the entire pool 3.
Just to remind you, your claim here has consistently been that Marvel Snap is better than LoR, because it's harder to get all the cards.
Now, to repeat my previous comment: it takes a full year of steady playing to collect complete sets of all of the cards in LoR.
Last I checked, a year is longer than a few months.
But you forgot one little thing: pool 3 is not the last pool of cards that you collect. And 99% of the players will never have all the cards in the game at any point. I'm not saying that because of that, Snap is better than LoR of whatever. I'm just saying that it's different, and that's cool.
And btw, collecting in Marvel Snap is not only about cards. Variants and splits are a big part of this game, but this of course if you care.
Nobody denies that.
My point is that as long as you don't have all the cards, you are forced to think for yourself how to replace them in the metadecks, based on what is in your collection. And the collections are different for everyone - that's the beauty, so primitive netdeking is impossible. Moreover, the collections are different for everyone not only throughout the entire third pool, but even after it, given how difficult it is to get cards from pool 4 and 5. Yes, at that point, there is already little diversity in the collections, but still. There are no such conditions in Hearthstone, or in Legends of Runeterra, or in Gwent, God rest his soul.
You are severely underestimating how long it takes to compile a full collection in Hearthstone, or even to build a specific deck on purpose. [EDIT - many people in HS, especially F2P players, have to build homebrew versions of meta decks because they dont have and cannot get all the cards, just like happens in Snap. The only difference is that Snap NEVER allows you to target a specific card you want, EVER.]
And of course, you are free to have your own preferences of what you want to do in a card game. Apparently you really enjoy a sense of accomplishment from collecting things that are hard to get.
In contrast, most people want to actually play the game with whatever cards they want to use at a given moment. Legends of Runeterra is perfect for that, since you can always target specific cards you want to get, and then you can build a deck with them and actually play it. And by the way, I have to call you out for your comment on LoR being so absurdly easy to get cards. Yes, it's very generous. But even with their generosity, it would still take the better part of a year to have a fully complete collection in LoR, as a F2P player. There are a TON of cards to collect. (When I started it took me about 9 months to fully complete my collection ... and there are a lot more cards now than when I started.)
There are a couple things going on this quote that are misunderstandings.
1) Literally everyone who hits collection level 486 has EXACTLY the same collection at that moment. Every single player, no exceptions. There is zero difference in their cards, just in their variants. Same thing for collection level 222 - every player at collection level 222 has identical collections with every other player at collection level 222.
2) Everyone in pool 3 has all of the pool 1 and pool 2 cards, guaranteed, no exceptions. This means that the only remaining variable is which cards your deck has that are exclusive to pool 3 or higher. This certainly allows for variations, but every deck will still contain a significant number of cards from pools 1 and 2.
3) Pools 4 and 5 are not actually separate pools. The only reason they are mentioned is because they have a different drop chance than pool 3. But you could theoretically get a "pool 5" card immediately after moving into pool 3 - anytime after collection level 486. You don't "move out" of pool 3 at any point, though I suppose you could say you're no longer in pool 3 if you manage to collect every single pool 3 card. But there is no collection level where you move from pool 3 to pool 4.
Okay...
1) 222 and 486. I mean, c'mon... Unless you want to stay a while at these CL, it's just two very short moments in time. That one core card of the meta deck might be the last card in your collection tree in that pool. Or two cards. Or three cards. So you play the whole pool 1 or 2 period with the substitutions you should think of.
2) The period you were saying lasts from 486 to 600. Not that long also. After 600 in pool 3 your opponents will be mostly with full meta decks. And pool 3 cards change the gameplay significantly. It's not fair to say that your deck will still consists of pool 1 and 2 cards. It will be a completely new game for you depending of what few pool 3 cards you will have. And you will think how to accompany them with cards you have in a best possible way. And this period lasts for a several months, until you have all the pool 3 cards.
3) And after that you will have probably 3-5 random cards from pools 4 and 5 and you start post-pool 3 period (doesn't matter how you name this period, I name it pool 4-5, why not, makes sense, you have all the pool 3 cards by now, now you get only 4's and 5's) with that and this period will last even longer than the previous one, I will say that it will last probably forever for 99% of the player base, because it is very hard to have all the cards from current pool 5 in any period of time.
Last two things. The difference is that Snap never allows you to target a specific card you want (well now it kinda allows, partially) is a very big difference. Being able to fully craft in other games a good meta-deck (you could craft good aggro deck pretty fast in any game) is a fundamental difference. It's not just "only" difference. And the second one, I wouldn't say anything about "most people" at all. It's still one person who expresses this point of view.
Peace.
Yeah like even Mogwai has been pretty quiet lately with his uploads and he was this games biggest cheerleader.
The problem is that the game just doesn't have "reactive plays."
Like if your opponent is playing patriot you could counter with enchantress. But that means you have to be playing that exact card.
There is no "removal" no "burst" no "combat phase" there's just tech cards really.
Ok. So, first we should establish that in NO CARD GAME should you expect to be favored in every single game you play. Variance - which cards you draw, which cards your opponent draws, which counter/tech cards you run (yes, tech cards do exist in other card games!) etc., will always have an impact on how the game plays out.
Secondly, let's talk about Snapping. Unlike Hearthstone (and most other CCGs with a ladder), in Snap, a player can make their wins count way more than their losses by knowing when they have the advantage and when they've been beat. No, you're not going to have a 75% winrate, no matter what deck you play - this is true of every card game (unless you're a Youtuber and you play four games with a deck). However, you can climb like you have a 75% winrate by retreating before you lose more than 2 cubes and snapping when you have a good chance of winning the game to increase your payout.
I also don't understand the argument that "homebrew" lists don't work in Snap because "everyone else" is running "top tier meta decks," especially when another argument being made against Snap is the lack of targeted card acquisition. How does everyone else have access to top tier meta decks if they also can't target every card they need for those decks?
Snap is NOT a perfect game, and if it's not the game for you THAT IS TOTALLY FINE. There are plenty of other games out there that can and will be your cup of tea. Don't act like a game is universally bad because you personally don't enjoy playing it, instead you should find a game you do enjoy playing.
In the end, I see this entire thread as a convincing argument that Snap is actually pretty decent, considering that one person is arguing that Snap is bad because it lacks reactive plays and another is arguing that Snap is bad because every deck you could play has an easy counter to it that any deck can run. Penalties offset, replay first post.
I have spoken.
I agree, it would take several months of steady playing to collect the entire pool 3.
Just to remind you, your claim here has consistently been that Marvel Snap is better than LoR, because it's harder to get all the cards.
Now, to repeat my previous comment: it takes a full year of steady playing to collect complete sets of all of the cards in LoR.
Last I checked, a year is longer than a few months.
Edit - I should clarify that I don't think Snap is actually bad - it's mediocre at best, but with some cool new ideas. What I do think is that it's highly deceptive at the beginning - the player experience through pools 1 and 2 are not even remotely similar to the experience after entering pool 3. Which brings me to the crux of my issue with Snap - it's not nearly as good as the hype makes it out to be, and it definitely did not deserve to win game of the year. If the entire game experience was similar to the pool 1 and 2 experience, the game would be flat-out amazing. But pool 3+ completely ruins it for me. It's like they did a giant bait-and-switch.
I'm glad it made game of the year over any blizzard game. The lesser evil. Like in politics. Lo
I am well aware of how snapping works. My final collection level before uninstalling the game was around 2700-2800.
Defenders of the game keep talking about snapping and how you need to do it properly. But here's the thing - let's assume everyone in the game learns how to snap properly (and based on your comments and those from other people, that shouldn't take all that long, so it's a completely reasonable assumption). What happens at that point?
Scenario 1 - you're in a losing position, so you retreat. Your opponent gets 1 lousy cube. Yay for them sort of? No big loss for you.
Scenario 2 - you're in a winning position, so your opponent retreats. You get 1 lousy cube. Yay? Not really.
Scenario 3 - it's unclear who is winning, or you expect a surprise, but you think you have a chance. You don't snap, and your opponent doesn't either (because they are thinking the same as you are, since they also understand snapping). The game ends and someone gets 2 cubes. Clearly better than 1, but still not that exciting.
Scenario 4 - one of you is confident of winning and snaps. At this point, if the snapper was playing correctly (which we already assumed they are), they will win this game. That means the one who didn't snap will retreat. Snapper gets only 1 cube.
There are several other variations, but I think the point is quite clear by now - if everyone snaps properly, no one ever gets or loses more than 2 cubes, and they generally only get or lose 1.
But you forgot one little thing: pool 3 is not the last pool of cards that you collect. And 99% of the players will never have all the cards in the game at any point. I'm not saying that because of that, Snap is better than LoR of whatever. I'm just saying that it's different, and that's cool.
And btw, collecting in Marvel Snap is not only about cards. Variants and splits are a big part of this game, but this of course if you care.